Сармати

[Khal Drogo]

Тема о Сарматима на форуму не постоји. Постоје теме гдје су ови степски ратници “инструмент“ зарад неких тумачења (Sarmatski Srbi), често се на разним темама “скрене“ на Сармате, међутим колико сам прегледао, тема о овом народу не постоји. Па да то исправимо.
Ко су били Сармати? Какво им је поријекло? Каква је веза са словенским народима? Зашто су их и зашто их и данас својатају у историографији неких народа? Нека су питања која би могли ако тема саживи, “прочешљати“.
За почетак ћемо сеосврнути начланако Сарматима у енгл.википедији (овдје)

Spojler: Sarmatians

Sarmatians

The Sarmatians (/sɑːrˈmeɪʃiənz/; Greek: Σαρμάται, Σαυρομάται; Latin: Sarmatae [ˈsar.mat̪ae̯], Sauromatae [sau̯ˈrɔmat̪ae̯]) were a large Iranian confederation that existed in classical antiquity, flourishing from about the 5th century BC to the 4th century AD.

Originating in the central parts of the Eurasian Steppe, the Sarmatians were part of the wider Scythian cultures.[1] They started migrating westward around the 4th and 3rd centuries BC, coming to dominate the closely related Scythians by 200 BC. At their greatest reported extent, around 1st century AD, these tribes ranged from the Vistula River to the mouth of the Danube and eastward to the Volga, bordering the shores of the Black and Caspian seas as well as the Caucasus to the south.

Their territory, which was known as Sarmatia (/sɑːrˈmeɪʃiə/) to Greco-Roman ethnographers, corresponded to the western part of greater Scythia (it included today's Central Ukraine, South-Eastern Ukraine, Southern Russia, Russian Volga and South-Ural regions, also to a smaller extent north-eastern Balkans and around Moldova). In the 1st century AD, the Sarmatians began encroaching upon the Roman Empire in alliance with Germanic tribes. In the 3rd century AD, their dominance of the Pontic Steppe was broken by the Germanic Goths. With the Hunnic invasions of the 4th century, many Sarmatians joined the Goths and other Germanic tribes (Vandals) in the settlement of the Western Roman Empire. Since large parts of today's Russia, specifically the land between the Ural Mountains and the Don River, were controlled in the 5th century BC by the Sarmatians, the Volga–Don and Ural steppes sometimes are also called "Sarmatian Motherland".[2][3]

The Sarmatians were eventually decisively assimilated (e.g. Slavicisation) and absorbed by the Proto-Slavic population of Eastern Europe.[4]

Indo-European topics
Part of a series on

Languages

Philology

Origins

Archaeology

Peoples and societies

Religion and mythology

Indo-European studies

v t e

Part of a series on the
History of Ukraine

Prehistory

Early history

Early modern history

Modern history

Topics by history

Ukraine portal

v t e

Part of a series on the
History of Russia
Prehistory • Antiquity • Early Slavs Rus' people pre–9th century Rus' Khaganate c. 830–899 Kievan Rus' 882–1240 Feudal Rus' (1097–1547) Mongol conquest • Vladimir-Suzdal Grand Duchy of Moscow • Novgorod Republic Tsardom of Russia 1547–1721 Russian Empire 1721–1917 Russian Revolution (1917–1923) February Revolution • Provisional Government Russian Republic • October Revolution • Civil War (Red Army • White Guard • separatists • others) Soviet Union 1922–1991 Russian Federation 1991–present
Timeline 860–1721 • 1721–1796 • 1796–1855 1855–1892 • 1892–1917 • 1917–1927 1927–1953 • 1953–1964 • 1964–1982 1982–1991 • 1991–present
Russia portal
v t e

Etymology​

Sarmatae probably originated as just one of several tribal names of the Sarmatians, but one that Greco-Roman ethnography came to apply as an exonym to the entire group. Strabo in the 1st century names as the main tribes of the Sarmatians the Iazyges, the Roxolani, the Aorsi and the Siraces.

The Greek name Sarmatai(Σαυρομάται) sometimes appears as "Sauromatai", which is almost certainly no more than a variant of the same name. Nevertheless, historians often regarded these as two separate peoples, while archaeologists habitually use the term 'Sauromatian' to identify the earliest phase of Sarmatian culture. Any idea that the name derives from the word lizard (sauros), linking to the Sarmatians' use of reptile-like scale armour and dragon standards, is almost certainly unfounded.[5] Whereas the word "ὀμμάτιον/ μάτι", meaning eye would suggest the origin of the name could be due to having what appeared as lizard eyes to Greeks.

Both Pliny the Elder (Natural History book iv) and Jordanes recognised the Sar- and Sauro- elements as interchangeable variants, referring to the same people. Greek authors of the 4th century (Pseudo-Scylax, Eudoxus of Cnidus) mention Syrmatae as the name of a people living at the Don, perhaps reflecting the ethnonym as it was pronounced in the final phase of Sarmatian culture.

English scholar Harold Walter Bailey (1899–1996) derived the base word from Avestan sar- (to move suddenly) from tsar- in Old Iranian (tsarati, tsaru-, hunter), which also gave its name to the western Avestan region of Sairima (*salm, – *Sairmi), and also connected it to the 10–11th century AD Persian epic Shahnameh's character "Salm".[6]

Oleg Trubachyov derived the name from the Indo-Aryan *sar-ma(n)t (feminine – rich in women, ruled by women), the Indo-Aryan and Indo-Iranian word *sar- (woman) and the Indo-Iranian adjective suffix -ma(n)t/wa(n)t.[7] By this derivation was noted the unusual high status of women (matriarchy) from the Greek point of view and went to the invention of Amazons (thus the Greek name for Sarmatians as Sarmatai Gynaikokratoumenoi, ruled by women).[7]

Ethnology​

The Sarmatians were part of the Iranian steppe peoples, among whom were also Scythians and Saka.[8] These are also grouped together as "East Iranians".[9] Archaeology has established the connection 'between the Iranian-speaking Scythians, Sarmatians and Saka and the earlier Timber-grave and Andronovo cultures'.[10] Based on building construction, these three peoples were the likely descendants of those earlier archaeological cultures.[11] The Sarmatians and Saka used the same stone construction methods as the earlier Andronovo culture.[12] The Timber grave (Srubnaya culture) and Andronovo house building traditions were further developed by these three peoples.[13] Andronovo pottery was continued by the Saka and Sarmatians.[14] Archaeologists describe the Andronovo culture people as exhibiting pronounced Caucasoid features.[15]

The first Sarmatians are mostly identified with the Prokhorovka culture, which moved from the southern Urals to the Lower Volga and then northern Pontic steppe, in the 4th–3rd centuries BC. During the migration, the Sarmatians seem to have grown and divided themselves into several groups, such as the Alans, Aorsi, Roxolani, and Iazyges. By 200 BC, the Sarmatians replaced the Scythians as the dominant people of the steppes.[16] The Sarmatians and Scythians had fought on the Pontic steppe to the north of the Black Sea.[17] The Sarmatians, described as a large confederation,[18] were to dominate these territories over the next five centuries.[19] According to Brzezinski and Mielczarek, the Sarmatians were formed between the Don River and the Ural Mountains.[19] Pliny the Elder (23–79 AD) wrote that they ranged from the Vistula River (in present-day Poland) to the Danube.

The Sarmatians differed from the Scythians in their veneration of the god of fire rather than god of nature, and women's prominent role in warfare, which possibly served as the inspiration for the Amazons.

Origin​

This section may be confusing or unclear to readers. Please help clarify the section. There might be a discussion about this on the talk page. (April 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

The two theories about the origin of the Sarmatian culture are:

• The Sarmatian culture was fully formed by the end of the fourth century BC, based on the combination of local Sauromatian culture of Southern Ural and foreign elements brought by tribes advancing from the forest-steppe Zauralye (Itkul culture, Gorohovo culture), from Kazakhstan and possibly from the Aral Sea region.[20] Sometime between the fourth and third century BC, a mass migration carried nomads of the Southern Ural to the west in the Lower Volga and a smaller migration to the north, south, and east. In the Lower Volga, Eastern nomads either partly assimilated local Sauromatian tribes, or pushed them into the Azov Sea and the Western Caucasus, where they subsequently formed a basis of nomadic association. A merging of the Southern Ural Prokhorovka culture with the Lower Volga or Sauromatian culture defines local differences between Prokhorovka monuments of Southern Ural and the Volga–Don region within a single culture.
• The Sarmatian culture in the Southern Ural evolved from the early Prokhorovka culture. The culture of the Lower Volga Sauromates developed at the same time as an independent community.[21]

Archaeology​

In 1947, Soviet archaeologist Boris Grakov[citation needed] defined a culture flourishing from the 6th century BC to the 4th century AD, apparent in late kurgan graves (buried within earthwork mounds), sometimes reusing part of much older kurgans.[22] It was a nomadic steppe culture ranging from the Black Sea eastward to beyond the Volga, and is especially evident at two of the major sites at Kardaielova and Chernaya in the trans-Uralic steppe. The four phases – distinguished by grave construction, burial customs, grave goods, and geographic spread – are:[18][23]

1. Sauromatian, 6th–5th centuries BC
2. Early Sarmatian, 4th–2nd centuries BC, also called the Prokhorovka culture
3. Middle Sarmatian, late 2nd century BC to late 2nd century AD
4. Late Sarmatian: late 2nd century AD to 4th century AD

While "Sarmatian" and "Sauromatian" are synonymous as ethnonyms, they are given different meanings purely by convention as archaeological technical terms. The term "Prokhorovka culture" derives from a complex of mounds in the Prokhorovski District, Orenburg region, excavated by S. I. Rudenko in 1916.[24]

In Hungary, a great Late Sarmatian pottery centre was reportedly unearthed between 2001 and 2006 near Budapest, in the Üllő5 archaeological site. Typical grey, granular Üllő5 ceramics form a distinct group of Sarmatian pottery found everywhere in the north-central part of the Great Hungarian Plain region, indicating a lively trading activity. A 1998 paper on the study of glass beads found in Sarmatian graves suggests wide cultural and trade links.[25]

Archaeological evidence suggests that Scythian-Sarmatian cultures may have given rise to the Greek legends of Amazons. Graves of armed females have been found in southern Ukraine and Russia. David Anthony notes, "About 20% of Scythian-Sarmatian "warrior graves" on the lower Don and lower Volga contained females dressed for battle as if they were men, a phenomenon that probably inspired the Greek tales about the Amazons."[26]

Language​

Main article: Scytho-Sarmatian languages



The Sarmatians spoke an Iranian language, derived from 'Old Iranian', that was heterogenous. By the 1st century BC, the Iranian tribes in what is today South Russia spoke different languages or dialects, clearly distinguishable.[27] According to a group of Iranologists writing in 1968, the numerous Iranian personal names in Greek inscriptions from the Black Sea coast indicated that the Sarmatians spoke a North-Eastern Iranian dialect ancestral to Alanian-Ossetian.[28] However, Harmatta (1970) argued that "the language of the Sarmatians or that of the Alans as a whole cannot be simply regarded as being Old Ossetian".[27]

Genetics​

A genetic study published in Nature Communications in March 2017 examined several Sarmatian individuals buried in Pokrovka, Russia (southwest of the Ural Mountains) between the 5th century BC and the 2nd century BC. The sample of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup R1b1a2a2. This was the dominant lineage among males of the earlier Yamnaya culture.[29] The eleven samples of mtDNA extracted belonged to the haplogroups U3, M, U1a'c, T, F1b, N1a1a1a1a, T2, U2e2, H2a1f, T1a and U5a1d2b.[30] The examined Sarmatians were found to be closely related to peoples of the earlier Yamnaya culture and Poltavka culture.[31]

A genetic study published in Nature in May 2018 examined the remains of twelve Sarmatians buried between 400 BC and 400 AD.[32] The five samples of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup R1a1, I2b, R (two samples) and R1.[33] The eleven samples of mtDNA extracted belonged to C4a1a, U4a2 (two samples), C4b1, I1, A, U2e1h (two samples), U4b1a4, H28 and U5a1.[34]

A genetic study published in Science Advances in October 2018 examined the remains of five Sarmatians buried between 55 AD and 320 AD. The three samples of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup R1a1a and R1b1a2a2 (two samples), while the five samples of mtDNA extracted belonged to haplogroup H2a1, T1a1, U5b2b (two samples) and D4q.[35]

A genetic study published in Current Biology in July 2019 examined the remains of nine Sarmatians. The five samples of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup Q1c-L332, R1a1e-CTS1123, R1a-Z645 (two samples) and E2b1-PF6746, while the nine samples of mtDNA extracted belonged to haplogroup W, W3a, T1a1, U5a2, U5b2a1a2, T1a1d, C1e, U5b2a1a1, U5b2c and U5b2c.[36]

In a study conducted in 2014 by Gennady Afanasiev, Dmitry Korobov and Irina Reshetova from the Institute of Archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, DNA was extracted from bone fragments found in 7 out of 10 Alanic burials on the Don River. Four of them turned out to belong to yDNA Haplogroup G2 and six of them possessed mtDNA haplogroup I.[37]

In 2015, the Institute of Archaeology in Moscow conducted research on various Sarmato-Alan and Saltovo-Mayaki culture Kurgan burials. In these analyses, the two Alan samples from the 4th to 6th century AD turned out to belong to yDNA haplogroups G2a-P15 and R1a-z94, while two of the three Sarmatian samples from the 2nd to 3rd century AD were found to belong to yDNA haplogroup J1-M267 while one belonged to R1a.[38] Three Saltovo-Mayaki samples from the 8th to 9th century AD turned out to have yDNA corresponding to haplogroups G, J2a-M410 and R1a-z94.[39]

Appearance​

In the late 2nd or early 3rd century AD, the Greek physician Galen declared that Sarmatians, Scythians and other northern peoples had reddish hair.[40] They are said to owe their name (Sarmatae) to it.[41]
The Alans were a group of Sarmatian tribes, according to the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus. He wrote, "Nearly all the Alani are men of great stature and beauty, their hair is somewhat yellow, their eyes are frighteningly fierce".[19]

Greco-Roman ethnography​

Herodotus (Histories 4.21) in the 5th century BC placed the land of the Sarmatians east of the Tanais, beginning at the corner of the Maeotian Lake, stretching northwards for fifteen days' journey, adjacent to the forested land of the Budinoi.

Herodotus (4.110–117) recounts that the Sauromatians arose from marriages of a group of Amazons and young Scythian men. In the story, some Amazons were captured in battle by Greeks in Pontus (northern Turkey) near the river Thermodon, and the captives were loaded into three boats. They overcame their captors while at sea, but were not able sailors. Their ships were blown north to the Maeotian Lake (the Sea of Azov) onto the shore of Scythia near the cliff region (today's southeastern Crimea). After encountering the Scythians and learning the Scythian language, they agreed to marry Scythian men, but only on the condition that they move away and not be required to follow the customs of Scythian women. According to Herodotus, the descendants of this band settled toward the northeast beyond the Tanais (Don) river and became the Sauromatians. Herodotus' account explains the origins of their language as an "impure" form of Scythian. He credits the unusual social freedoms of Sauromatae women, including participation in warfare, as an inheritance from their Amazon ancestors. Later writers refer to the "woman-ruled Sarmatae" (γυναικοκρατούμενοι).[42]

Herodotus (4.118–144) later relates how the Sauromatians under their king Scopasis, answered the Scythian call for help against the Persian King Darius I, to repel his campaign in Scythia, along with the Gelonians and the Boudinians. The Persians invaded much of the Sauromatian territory, but were eventually forced to withdraw due to the tribespeoples' tactics of delay and use of a scorched earth policy.[43]

Hippocrates[44] explicitly classes them as Scythian and describes their warlike women and their customs:

Their women, so long as they are virgins, ride, shoot, throw the javelin while mounted, and fight with their enemies. They do not lay aside their virginity until they have killed three of their enemies, and they do not marry before they have performed the traditional sacred rites. A woman who takes to herself a husband no longer rides, unless she is compelled to do so by a general expedition. They have no right breast; for while they are yet babies their mothers make red-hot a bronze instrument constructed for this very purpose and apply it to the right breast and cauterize it, so that its growth is arrested, and all its strength and bulk are diverted to the right shoulder and right arm.

Polybius (XXV, 1) mentions them for the first time as a force to be reckoned with in 179 B.C.[17]

Strabo[45] mentions the Sarmatians in a number of places, but never says much about them. He uses both the terms of Sarmatai and Sauromatai, but never together, and never suggesting that they are different peoples. He often pairs Sarmatians and Scythians in reference to a series of ethnic names, never stating which is which, as though Sarmatian or Scythian could apply equally to them all.[46]

Strabo wrote that the Sarmatians extend from above the Danube eastward to the Volga, and from north of the Dnieper River into the Caucasus, where, he says, they are called Caucasii like everyone else there. This statement indicates that the Alans already had a home in the Caucasus, without waiting for the Huns to push them there.

Even more significantly, he points to a Celtic admixture in the region of the Basternae, who, he said, were of Germanic origin. The Celtic Boii, Scordisci and Taurisci are there. A fourth ethnic element interacting and intermarrying are the Thracians (7.3.2). Moreover, the peoples toward the north are Keltoskythai, "Celtic Scythians" (11.6.2).

Strabo portrays the peoples of the region as being nomadic, or Hamaksoikoi, "wagon-dwellers", and Galaktophagoi, "milk-eaters". This latter likely referred to the universal kumis eaten in historical times. The wagons were used for transporting tents made of felt, a type of the yurts used universally by Asian nomads.

Pliny the Elder writes (4.12.79–81):

From this point (the mouth of the Danube) all the races in general are Scythian, though various sections have occupied the lands adjacent to the coast, in one place the Getae ... at another the Sarmatae ... Agrippa describes the whole of this area from the Danube to the sea ... as far as the river Vistula in the direction of the Sarmatian desert ... The name of the Scythians has spread in every direction, as far as the Sarmatae and the Germans, but this old designation has not continued for any except the most outlying sections ...

According to Pliny, Scythian rule once extended as far as Germany. Jordanes supports this hypothesis by telling us on the one hand that he was familiar with the Geography of Ptolemy, which includes the entire Balto-Slavic territory in Sarmatia,[citation needed] and on the other that this same region was Scythia. By "Sarmatia", Jordanes means only the Aryan territory. The Sarmatians were, therefore, a sub-group of the broader Scythian peoples.

Tacitus' De Origine et situ Germanorum speaks of "mutual fear" between Germanic peoples and Sarmatians:

All Germania is divided from Gaul, Raetia, and Pannonia by the Rhine and Danube rivers; from the Sarmatians and the Dacians by shared fear and mountains. The Ocean laps the rest, embracing wide bays and enormous stretches of islands. Just recently, we learned about certain tribes and kings, whom war brought to light.[47]

According to Tacitus, like the Persians, the Sarmatians wore long, flowing robes (ch 17). Moreover, the Sarmatians exacted tribute from the Cotini and Osi, and iron from the Cotini (ch. 43), "to their shame" (presumably because they could have used the iron to arm themselves and resist).

By the 3rd century BC, the Sarmatian name appears to have supplanted the Scythian in the plains of what is now south Ukraine. The geographer, Ptolemy,[citation needed] reports them at what must be their maximum extent, divided into adjoining European and central Asian sections. Considering the overlap of tribal names between the Scythians and the Sarmatians, no new displacements probably took place. The people were the same Indo-Europeans, but were referred to under yet another name.

Later, Pausanias, viewing votive offerings near the Athenian Acropolis in the 2nd century AD,[48] found among them a Sauromic breastplate.

On seeing this a man will say that no less than Greeks are foreigners skilled in the arts: for the Sauromatae have no iron, neither mined by themselves nor yet imported. They have, in fact, no dealings at all with the foreigners around them. To meet this deficiency they have contrived inventions. In place of iron they use bone for their spear-blades and cornel wood for their bows and arrows, with bone points for the arrows. They throw a lasso round any enemy they meet, and then turning round their horses upset the enemy caught in the lasso. Their breastplates they make in the following fashion. Each man keeps many mares, since the land is not divided into private allotments, nor does it bear any thing except wild trees, as the people are nomads. These mares they not only use for war, but also sacrifice them to the local gods and eat them for food. Their hoofs they collect, clean, split, and make from them as it were python scales. Whoever has never seen a python must at least have seen a pine-cone still green. He will not be mistaken if he liken the product from the hoof to the segments that are seen on the pine-cone. These pieces they bore and stitch together with the sinews of horses and oxen, and then use them as breastplates that are as handsome and strong as those of the Greeks. For they can withstand blows of missiles and those struck in close combat.

Pausanias' description is well borne out in a relief from Tanais (see image). These facts are not necessarily incompatible with Tacitus, as the western Sarmatians might have kept their iron to themselves, it having been a scarce commodity on the plains.

In the late 4th century, Ammianus Marcellinus[49] describes a severe defeat which Sarmatian raiders inflicted upon Roman forces in the province of Valeria in Pannonia in late AD 374. The Sarmatians almost destroyed two legions: one recruited from Moesia and one from Pannonia. The latter had been sent to intercept a party of Sarmatians which had been in pursuit of a senior Roman officer named Aequitius. The two legions failed to coordinate, allowing the Sarmatians to catch them unprepared.

Decline in the 4th century​

See also: Alans and Ossetians

The Sarmatians remained dominant until the Gothic ascendancy in the Black Sea area (Oium). Goths attacked Sarmatian tribes on the north of the Danube in Dacia, in present-day Romania. The Roman Emperor Constantine I (r. 306–337) summoned his son Constantine II from Gaul to campaign north of the Danube. In 332, in very cold weather, the Romans were victorious, killing 100,000 Goths and capturing Ariaricus, the son of the Gothic king. In their efforts to halt the Gothic expansion and replace it with their own on the north of Lower Danube (present-day Romania), the Sarmatians armed their "servants" Limigantes. After the Roman victory, however, the local population revolted against their Sarmatian masters, pushing them beyond the Roman border. Constantine, on whom the Sarmatians had called for help, defeated the Limigantes, and moved the Sarmatian population back in. In the Roman provinces, Sarmatian combatants enlisted in the Roman army, whilst the rest of the population sought refuge throughout Thrace, Macedonia and Italy. The Origo Constantini mentions 300,000 refugees resulting from this conflict. The Emperor Constantine was subsequently attributed the title of Sarmaticus Maximus.[50]

In the 4th and 5th centuries the Huns expanded and conquered both the Sarmatians and the Germanic tribes living between the Black Sea and the borders of the Roman Empire. From bases in modern-day Hungary, the Huns ruled the entire former Sarmatian territory. Their various constituents flourished under Hunnish rule, fought for the Huns against a combination of Roman and Germanic troops, and departed after the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains (451), the death of Attila (453) and the appearance of the Bulgar ruling elements west of the Volga.

Eventually the Proto-Slavic population of Eastern Europe decisively assimilated and absorbed the Sarmatians around the Early Middle Ages.[51][52] However, a related people to the Sarmatians, known as the Alans, survived in the North Caucasus into the Early Middle Ages, ultimately giving rise to the modern Ossetic ethnic group

Сармати су била конфедерација (вјероватно) иранских племена која је постојала у времену антике отприлике од 5. вијека п.н.е. до 4. вијека нове ере.
Територија коју су настањивали бјеше позната као Сарматија, укључивала би области данашње централне Украјине , југоисточне Украјине, јужне Русији , области око Волге и Јужног Урала , такође у мањој мјери сјевероисточни Балкан и простор Молдавије .
Сармати су сродни Скитима, од Скита су се разликовали по штовању бога ватре, а не бога природе, и важну улогу су имале и жене ратници, што је можда послужило као инспирација за Амазонке.
Будући да су велике дијелове данашње Русије, посебно земљу између планина Урал и ријеке Дон (антички Танаис, који у римској географији раздваја Европу и Азију), у 5. вијеку прије нове ере насељавали Сармати, тај простор се некад назива и "сарматском матицом".

Kарта Римског царства за времена Хадријана (владао 117-138 год.н.е,) која показује тадашње пребивалиште Сармата

У историјским рукописима Сармате први помиње Херодот (овдје, књига четврта, поглавље Амазонке) под именом Сауромати и у свом препричавачком стилу пише да су настали спајањем скитских младића и Амазонки, тих жена ратница

Сауромати говоре скитским језиком, али одувек говоре неправилно, јер га Амазонке нису биле добро научиле. У погледу удаје код њих постоји овакав обичај: ниједна девојка не може да се уда док не убије бар једног непријатеља. А неке од њих остаре и умру неудате, јер нису могле да испуне одређене прописе

те да говоре скитским језиком, али неправилним.

Иако је обично прихваћено да су "Сауромати" само друга варијанта имена Сармати, постоје историчари који су става да се не може успоставити директна линија развоја између ова два народа, Сауромата са каснијим Сарматима, док археолози уобичајено користе термин „sauromatian“ како би идентиkovали најранију фазу сарматске културе.
Клаудије Птоломеј је у свом трактату "Водич за географију" писао о европским и азијским Сарматима, чија је граница била између ријеке Танаис.
Амијан Маркелин (330-400. год. н.е.), описивајући Хуне, говори да ово племе живи око Азовског мора у правцу Леденог океана и да су дошли до земље Алана - државе древних Масагетија. Маркелин мисли да су источно од ријеке Дон на просторима Скитске пустиње, и Сармате да су сјеверно од Дунава. Из поменутог се види да Маркелин разликује Сармате од Алана који су се могли развити (?) из чувеног ратнилког племена Масагети.
У 5-4. вијеку прије н. е. Сармати су мирни комшије Скита. Скити су били трговци, ишли су у источне земље, па су им Сармати дозволили да пролазе кроз сарматске земље. У рату са Персијанцима Сармати су били поуздани савезници Скита. У вријеме Атеја, још увијек су били на снази савезнички односи, сарматски одреди су били на служби у војци и на двору скитског краља. Појединачне групе Сармата су се населиле на територији европске Скитије.
У 3. вијеку прије н. е. прекинути су пријатељски односи, отпочела су непријатељства и војни напади Сармата на Скитију. Агресивна борбеност младих сарматских савеза поклопила се са слабљењем скитског царства. На крају 4. вијека прије н. е, Скити су поражени од стране владара Тракије Лизимакса. Трачани и келтска племена Галаћани притисла су Ските на западу. Посљедица неуспјелог рата је био привредни пад и пада скитског утцаја међу освојеним земаљама и племенима.
Након освајања европских Скита, Сармати су стекли славу као најмоћнији народи старог вијека. Све источно од Европе, заједно са Кавказом је названо Сарматија. Пошто је основала доминацију у европским земљама, Сармати су почели да успостављавају мирољубиве трговачке договоре, па је дошло до трговине са грчким градовима у Црном мору.
У 1. вијеку нове ере, Сармати су почели нападати Римско царство у савезу са германска племенима
Почевши од 2. века п. н. е Сармати су се све чешће појављивали у грчким, римским списима и код оријенталних аутора. Страбон помиње сарматска племена Јазиге, Роксолане, Аорсе, Сираке и Алане.

Опис војне моћи ових племена имамо у дјелу (овдје),цитат који је на другој теми приложио форумаш Slaven777

The Siraces were Sarmatians that migrated to the Black Sea/Sea of Azov coast, south of the Don, in the late fifth century BCE. They often appear in classical works alongside the Bosporan Kingdom, who they maintained close relations with. At one point, Strabo mentions that the Siraces during the reign of King Abeacus were able to raise around 20,000 riders. From what we can conclude though, they were a relatively smaller tribe, so we can’t confirm that this is accurate. The close proximity they maintained between the Pontic and Bosporan Kingdoms made them the most Hellenized of the Sarmatians, and although most of their aristocracy kept a semi-nomadic lifestyle, most of the population was sedentary.[100]
The Aorsi lived in the open plateau south of the Don and northeast of the Siraces. Strabo indicates that the Aorsi was one of the most prominent Sarmatian peoples and was, in fact, divided between the lower and upper Aorsi. The lower Aorsi was described as being able to field around 200,000 riders and lived in the plateau south of the Don. The upper Aorsi occupied a more significant area consisting of all the cost of the Caspian Sea, and modern studies have traced their influence all the way to the Aral Sea.[101]

The Roxolani and Iazyges were in the vanguard of the Sarmatian move westward, and all evidence points to them as being the first Sarmatians to cross the river, Don. The two tribes were located in different geographical zones; the Roxolani mostly kept themselves in the region south of Ukraine of the forest-steppe, while the Iazyges kept to the Crimean territories and the coast of the Black Sea/Azov Sea. Their gradual advancement westward of the Don started in the second century BCE and lasted until the Roxolani had reached the region of Moesia in the first century CE and threatened the eastern region of the Roman Empire.[102]

The Alans were the last of what we call the Sarmatian tribes to appear in the Black Sea region coming from Central Asia in the mid-first century CE. They are described as not being wholly Sarmatian and are thought to have had a tribal composition of both Central Asian and Sarmatian origins. Some authors of antiquity point to the Sarmatian part of the Alans having originated in the tribe of the Massagetae, who had mixed with several Saka peoples and other Central Asians. [103]

У 3. вијеку доминацију Сармата понтском степом прекинули су Готи.
Између 370. и 380. године, Хуни су напали Остроготе, а пре тога су напали Алане код Азовског мора.
Током инвазије Хуна у 4. стољећу, многи Сармати придружују се Готима и другим германским племенима (прије свих Вандалима) у насељу Западно Римско Царство.
Сармати по прелазу у рани средњи вијек полако нестају са историјске позорнице, вјероватно асимиловани у словенске народе источне Европе.

Толико у уводном посту, ако тема саживи, написаће се још која.

 

[Khal Drogo]

Сасвим коректан аудио запис који нас води кроз историју Саермата;

 

[Pumpaj Dinstanović]

Тема о Сарматима на форуму не постоји. Постоје теме гдје су ови степски ратници “инструмент“ зарад неких тумачења (Sarmatski Srbi), често се на разним темама “скрене“ на Сармате, међутим колико сам прегледао, тема о овом народу не постоји. Па да то исправимо.
Ко су били Сармати? Какво им је поријекло? Каква је веза са словенским народима? Зашто су их и зашто их и данас својатају у историографији неких народа? Нека су питања која би могли ако тема саживи, “прочешљати“.
За почетак ћемо сеосврнути начланако Сарматима у енгл.википедији (овдје)

Spojler: Sarmatians

Sarmatians

The Sarmatians (/sɑːrˈmeɪʃiənz/; Greek: Σαρμάται, Σαυρομάται; Latin: Sarmatae [ˈsar.mat̪ae̯], Sauromatae [sau̯ˈrɔmat̪ae̯]) were a large Iranian confederation that existed in classical antiquity, flourishing from about the 5th century BC to the 4th century AD.

Originating in the central parts of the Eurasian Steppe, the Sarmatians were part of the wider Scythian cultures.[1] They started migrating westward around the 4th and 3rd centuries BC, coming to dominate the closely related Scythians by 200 BC. At their greatest reported extent, around 1st century AD, these tribes ranged from the Vistula River to the mouth of the Danube and eastward to the Volga, bordering the shores of the Black and Caspian seas as well as the Caucasus to the south.

Their territory, which was known as Sarmatia (/sɑːrˈmeɪʃiə/) to Greco-Roman ethnographers, corresponded to the western part of greater Scythia (it included today's Central Ukraine, South-Eastern Ukraine, Southern Russia, Russian Volga and South-Ural regions, also to a smaller extent north-eastern Balkans and around Moldova). In the 1st century AD, the Sarmatians began encroaching upon the Roman Empire in alliance with Germanic tribes. In the 3rd century AD, their dominance of the Pontic Steppe was broken by the Germanic Goths. With the Hunnic invasions of the 4th century, many Sarmatians joined the Goths and other Germanic tribes (Vandals) in the settlement of the Western Roman Empire. Since large parts of today's Russia, specifically the land between the Ural Mountains and the Don River, were controlled in the 5th century BC by the Sarmatians, the Volga–Don and Ural steppes sometimes are also called "Sarmatian Motherland".[2][3]

The Sarmatians were eventually decisively assimilated (e.g. Slavicisation) and absorbed by the Proto-Slavic population of Eastern Europe.[4]

Indo-European topics
Part of a series on

Languages

Philology

Origins

Archaeology

Peoples and societies

Religion and mythology

Indo-European studies

v t e

Part of a series on the
History of Ukraine

Prehistory

Early history

Early modern history

Modern history

Topics by history

Ukraine portal

v t e

Part of a series on the
History of Russia
Prehistory • Antiquity • Early Slavs Rus' people pre–9th century Rus' Khaganate c. 830–899 Kievan Rus' 882–1240 Feudal Rus' (1097–1547) Mongol conquest • Vladimir-Suzdal Grand Duchy of Moscow • Novgorod Republic Tsardom of Russia 1547–1721 Russian Empire 1721–1917 Russian Revolution (1917–1923) February Revolution • Provisional Government Russian Republic • October Revolution • Civil War (Red Army • White Guard • separatists • others) Soviet Union 1922–1991 Russian Federation 1991–present
Timeline 860–1721 • 1721–1796 • 1796–1855 1855–1892 • 1892–1917 • 1917–1927 1927–1953 • 1953–1964 • 1964–1982 1982–1991 • 1991–present
Russia portal
v t e

Etymology​

Sarmatae probably originated as just one of several tribal names of the Sarmatians, but one that Greco-Roman ethnography came to apply as an exonym to the entire group. Strabo in the 1st century names as the main tribes of the Sarmatians the Iazyges, the Roxolani, the Aorsi and the Siraces.

The Greek name Sarmatai(Σαυρομάται) sometimes appears as "Sauromatai", which is almost certainly no more than a variant of the same name. Nevertheless, historians often regarded these as two separate peoples, while archaeologists habitually use the term 'Sauromatian' to identify the earliest phase of Sarmatian culture. Any idea that the name derives from the word lizard (sauros), linking to the Sarmatians' use of reptile-like scale armour and dragon standards, is almost certainly unfounded.[5] Whereas the word "ὀμμάτιον/ μάτι", meaning eye would suggest the origin of the name could be due to having what appeared as lizard eyes to Greeks.

Both Pliny the Elder (Natural History book iv) and Jordanes recognised the Sar- and Sauro- elements as interchangeable variants, referring to the same people. Greek authors of the 4th century (Pseudo-Scylax, Eudoxus of Cnidus) mention Syrmatae as the name of a people living at the Don, perhaps reflecting the ethnonym as it was pronounced in the final phase of Sarmatian culture.

English scholar Harold Walter Bailey (1899–1996) derived the base word from Avestan sar- (to move suddenly) from tsar- in Old Iranian (tsarati, tsaru-, hunter), which also gave its name to the western Avestan region of Sairima (*salm, – *Sairmi), and also connected it to the 10–11th century AD Persian epic Shahnameh's character "Salm".[6]

Oleg Trubachyov derived the name from the Indo-Aryan *sar-ma(n)t (feminine – rich in women, ruled by women), the Indo-Aryan and Indo-Iranian word *sar- (woman) and the Indo-Iranian adjective suffix -ma(n)t/wa(n)t.[7] By this derivation was noted the unusual high status of women (matriarchy) from the Greek point of view and went to the invention of Amazons (thus the Greek name for Sarmatians as Sarmatai Gynaikokratoumenoi, ruled by women).[7]

Ethnology​

The Sarmatians were part of the Iranian steppe peoples, among whom were also Scythians and Saka.[8] These are also grouped together as "East Iranians".[9] Archaeology has established the connection 'between the Iranian-speaking Scythians, Sarmatians and Saka and the earlier Timber-grave and Andronovo cultures'.[10] Based on building construction, these three peoples were the likely descendants of those earlier archaeological cultures.[11] The Sarmatians and Saka used the same stone construction methods as the earlier Andronovo culture.[12] The Timber grave (Srubnaya culture) and Andronovo house building traditions were further developed by these three peoples.[13] Andronovo pottery was continued by the Saka and Sarmatians.[14] Archaeologists describe the Andronovo culture people as exhibiting pronounced Caucasoid features.[15]

The first Sarmatians are mostly identified with the Prokhorovka culture, which moved from the southern Urals to the Lower Volga and then northern Pontic steppe, in the 4th–3rd centuries BC. During the migration, the Sarmatians seem to have grown and divided themselves into several groups, such as the Alans, Aorsi, Roxolani, and Iazyges. By 200 BC, the Sarmatians replaced the Scythians as the dominant people of the steppes.[16] The Sarmatians and Scythians had fought on the Pontic steppe to the north of the Black Sea.[17] The Sarmatians, described as a large confederation,[18] were to dominate these territories over the next five centuries.[19] According to Brzezinski and Mielczarek, the Sarmatians were formed between the Don River and the Ural Mountains.[19] Pliny the Elder (23–79 AD) wrote that they ranged from the Vistula River (in present-day Poland) to the Danube.

The Sarmatians differed from the Scythians in their veneration of the god of fire rather than god of nature, and women's prominent role in warfare, which possibly served as the inspiration for the Amazons.

Origin​

This section may be confusing or unclear to readers. Please help clarify the section. There might be a discussion about this on the talk page. (April 2019) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)

The two theories about the origin of the Sarmatian culture are:

• The Sarmatian culture was fully formed by the end of the fourth century BC, based on the combination of local Sauromatian culture of Southern Ural and foreign elements brought by tribes advancing from the forest-steppe Zauralye (Itkul culture, Gorohovo culture), from Kazakhstan and possibly from the Aral Sea region.[20] Sometime between the fourth and third century BC, a mass migration carried nomads of the Southern Ural to the west in the Lower Volga and a smaller migration to the north, south, and east. In the Lower Volga, Eastern nomads either partly assimilated local Sauromatian tribes, or pushed them into the Azov Sea and the Western Caucasus, where they subsequently formed a basis of nomadic association. A merging of the Southern Ural Prokhorovka culture with the Lower Volga or Sauromatian culture defines local differences between Prokhorovka monuments of Southern Ural and the Volga–Don region within a single culture.
• The Sarmatian culture in the Southern Ural evolved from the early Prokhorovka culture. The culture of the Lower Volga Sauromates developed at the same time as an independent community.[21]

Archaeology​

In 1947, Soviet archaeologist Boris Grakov[citation needed] defined a culture flourishing from the 6th century BC to the 4th century AD, apparent in late kurgan graves (buried within earthwork mounds), sometimes reusing part of much older kurgans.[22] It was a nomadic steppe culture ranging from the Black Sea eastward to beyond the Volga, and is especially evident at two of the major sites at Kardaielova and Chernaya in the trans-Uralic steppe. The four phases – distinguished by grave construction, burial customs, grave goods, and geographic spread – are:[18][23]

1. Sauromatian, 6th–5th centuries BC
2. Early Sarmatian, 4th–2nd centuries BC, also called the Prokhorovka culture
3. Middle Sarmatian, late 2nd century BC to late 2nd century AD
4. Late Sarmatian: late 2nd century AD to 4th century AD

While "Sarmatian" and "Sauromatian" are synonymous as ethnonyms, they are given different meanings purely by convention as archaeological technical terms. The term "Prokhorovka culture" derives from a complex of mounds in the Prokhorovski District, Orenburg region, excavated by S. I. Rudenko in 1916.[24]

In Hungary, a great Late Sarmatian pottery centre was reportedly unearthed between 2001 and 2006 near Budapest, in the Üllő5 archaeological site. Typical grey, granular Üllő5 ceramics form a distinct group of Sarmatian pottery found everywhere in the north-central part of the Great Hungarian Plain region, indicating a lively trading activity. A 1998 paper on the study of glass beads found in Sarmatian graves suggests wide cultural and trade links.[25]

Archaeological evidence suggests that Scythian-Sarmatian cultures may have given rise to the Greek legends of Amazons. Graves of armed females have been found in southern Ukraine and Russia. David Anthony notes, "About 20% of Scythian-Sarmatian "warrior graves" on the lower Don and lower Volga contained females dressed for battle as if they were men, a phenomenon that probably inspired the Greek tales about the Amazons."[26]

Language​

Main article: Scytho-Sarmatian languages



The Sarmatians spoke an Iranian language, derived from 'Old Iranian', that was heterogenous. By the 1st century BC, the Iranian tribes in what is today South Russia spoke different languages or dialects, clearly distinguishable.[27] According to a group of Iranologists writing in 1968, the numerous Iranian personal names in Greek inscriptions from the Black Sea coast indicated that the Sarmatians spoke a North-Eastern Iranian dialect ancestral to Alanian-Ossetian.[28] However, Harmatta (1970) argued that "the language of the Sarmatians or that of the Alans as a whole cannot be simply regarded as being Old Ossetian".[27]

Genetics​

A genetic study published in Nature Communications in March 2017 examined several Sarmatian individuals buried in Pokrovka, Russia (southwest of the Ural Mountains) between the 5th century BC and the 2nd century BC. The sample of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup R1b1a2a2. This was the dominant lineage among males of the earlier Yamnaya culture.[29] The eleven samples of mtDNA extracted belonged to the haplogroups U3, M, U1a'c, T, F1b, N1a1a1a1a, T2, U2e2, H2a1f, T1a and U5a1d2b.[30] The examined Sarmatians were found to be closely related to peoples of the earlier Yamnaya culture and Poltavka culture.[31]

A genetic study published in Nature in May 2018 examined the remains of twelve Sarmatians buried between 400 BC and 400 AD.[32] The five samples of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup R1a1, I2b, R (two samples) and R1.[33] The eleven samples of mtDNA extracted belonged to C4a1a, U4a2 (two samples), C4b1, I1, A, U2e1h (two samples), U4b1a4, H28 and U5a1.[34]

A genetic study published in Science Advances in October 2018 examined the remains of five Sarmatians buried between 55 AD and 320 AD. The three samples of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup R1a1a and R1b1a2a2 (two samples), while the five samples of mtDNA extracted belonged to haplogroup H2a1, T1a1, U5b2b (two samples) and D4q.[35]

A genetic study published in Current Biology in July 2019 examined the remains of nine Sarmatians. The five samples of Y-DNA extracted belonged to haplogroup Q1c-L332, R1a1e-CTS1123, R1a-Z645 (two samples) and E2b1-PF6746, while the nine samples of mtDNA extracted belonged to haplogroup W, W3a, T1a1, U5a2, U5b2a1a2, T1a1d, C1e, U5b2a1a1, U5b2c and U5b2c.[36]

In a study conducted in 2014 by Gennady Afanasiev, Dmitry Korobov and Irina Reshetova from the Institute of Archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, DNA was extracted from bone fragments found in 7 out of 10 Alanic burials on the Don River. Four of them turned out to belong to yDNA Haplogroup G2 and six of them possessed mtDNA haplogroup I.[37]

In 2015, the Institute of Archaeology in Moscow conducted research on various Sarmato-Alan and Saltovo-Mayaki culture Kurgan burials. In these analyses, the two Alan samples from the 4th to 6th century AD turned out to belong to yDNA haplogroups G2a-P15 and R1a-z94, while two of the three Sarmatian samples from the 2nd to 3rd century AD were found to belong to yDNA haplogroup J1-M267 while one belonged to R1a.[38] Three Saltovo-Mayaki samples from the 8th to 9th century AD turned out to have yDNA corresponding to haplogroups G, J2a-M410 and R1a-z94.[39]

Appearance​

In the late 2nd or early 3rd century AD, the Greek physician Galen declared that Sarmatians, Scythians and other northern peoples had reddish hair.[40] They are said to owe their name (Sarmatae) to it.[41]
The Alans were a group of Sarmatian tribes, according to the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus. He wrote, "Nearly all the Alani are men of great stature and beauty, their hair is somewhat yellow, their eyes are frighteningly fierce".[19]

Greco-Roman ethnography​

Herodotus (Histories 4.21) in the 5th century BC placed the land of the Sarmatians east of the Tanais, beginning at the corner of the Maeotian Lake, stretching northwards for fifteen days' journey, adjacent to the forested land of the Budinoi.

Herodotus (4.110–117) recounts that the Sauromatians arose from marriages of a group of Amazons and young Scythian men. In the story, some Amazons were captured in battle by Greeks in Pontus (northern Turkey) near the river Thermodon, and the captives were loaded into three boats. They overcame their captors while at sea, but were not able sailors. Their ships were blown north to the Maeotian Lake (the Sea of Azov) onto the shore of Scythia near the cliff region (today's southeastern Crimea). After encountering the Scythians and learning the Scythian language, they agreed to marry Scythian men, but only on the condition that they move away and not be required to follow the customs of Scythian women. According to Herodotus, the descendants of this band settled toward the northeast beyond the Tanais (Don) river and became the Sauromatians. Herodotus' account explains the origins of their language as an "impure" form of Scythian. He credits the unusual social freedoms of Sauromatae women, including participation in warfare, as an inheritance from their Amazon ancestors. Later writers refer to the "woman-ruled Sarmatae" (γυναικοκρατούμενοι).[42]

Herodotus (4.118–144) later relates how the Sauromatians under their king Scopasis, answered the Scythian call for help against the Persian King Darius I, to repel his campaign in Scythia, along with the Gelonians and the Boudinians. The Persians invaded much of the Sauromatian territory, but were eventually forced to withdraw due to the tribespeoples' tactics of delay and use of a scorched earth policy.[43]

Hippocrates[44] explicitly classes them as Scythian and describes their warlike women and their customs:



Polybius (XXV, 1) mentions them for the first time as a force to be reckoned with in 179 B.C.[17]

Strabo[45] mentions the Sarmatians in a number of places, but never says much about them. He uses both the terms of Sarmatai and Sauromatai, but never together, and never suggesting that they are different peoples. He often pairs Sarmatians and Scythians in reference to a series of ethnic names, never stating which is which, as though Sarmatian or Scythian could apply equally to them all.[46]

Strabo wrote that the Sarmatians extend from above the Danube eastward to the Volga, and from north of the Dnieper River into the Caucasus, where, he says, they are called Caucasii like everyone else there. This statement indicates that the Alans already had a home in the Caucasus, without waiting for the Huns to push them there.

Even more significantly, he points to a Celtic admixture in the region of the Basternae, who, he said, were of Germanic origin. The Celtic Boii, Scordisci and Taurisci are there. A fourth ethnic element interacting and intermarrying are the Thracians (7.3.2). Moreover, the peoples toward the north are Keltoskythai, "Celtic Scythians" (11.6.2).

Strabo portrays the peoples of the region as being nomadic, or Hamaksoikoi, "wagon-dwellers", and Galaktophagoi, "milk-eaters". This latter likely referred to the universal kumis eaten in historical times. The wagons were used for transporting tents made of felt, a type of the yurts used universally by Asian nomads.

Pliny the Elder writes (4.12.79–81):



According to Pliny, Scythian rule once extended as far as Germany. Jordanes supports this hypothesis by telling us on the one hand that he was familiar with the Geography of Ptolemy, which includes the entire Balto-Slavic territory in Sarmatia,[citation needed] and on the other that this same region was Scythia. By "Sarmatia", Jordanes means only the Aryan territory. The Sarmatians were, therefore, a sub-group of the broader Scythian peoples.

Tacitus' De Origine et situ Germanorum speaks of "mutual fear" between Germanic peoples and Sarmatians:



According to Tacitus, like the Persians, the Sarmatians wore long, flowing robes (ch 17). Moreover, the Sarmatians exacted tribute from the Cotini and Osi, and iron from the Cotini (ch. 43), "to their shame" (presumably because they could have used the iron to arm themselves and resist).

By the 3rd century BC, the Sarmatian name appears to have supplanted the Scythian in the plains of what is now south Ukraine. The geographer, Ptolemy,[citation needed] reports them at what must be their maximum extent, divided into adjoining European and central Asian sections. Considering the overlap of tribal names between the Scythians and the Sarmatians, no new displacements probably took place. The people were the same Indo-Europeans, but were referred to under yet another name.

Later, Pausanias, viewing votive offerings near the Athenian Acropolis in the 2nd century AD,[48] found among them a Sauromic breastplate.



Pausanias' description is well borne out in a relief from Tanais (see image). These facts are not necessarily incompatible with Tacitus, as the western Sarmatians might have kept their iron to themselves, it having been a scarce commodity on the plains.

In the late 4th century, Ammianus Marcellinus[49] describes a severe defeat which Sarmatian raiders inflicted upon Roman forces in the province of Valeria in Pannonia in late AD 374. The Sarmatians almost destroyed two legions: one recruited from Moesia and one from Pannonia. The latter had been sent to intercept a party of Sarmatians which had been in pursuit of a senior Roman officer named Aequitius. The two legions failed to coordinate, allowing the Sarmatians to catch them unprepared.

Decline in the 4th century​

See also: Alans and Ossetians

The Sarmatians remained dominant until the Gothic ascendancy in the Black Sea area (Oium). Goths attacked Sarmatian tribes on the north of the Danube in Dacia, in present-day Romania. The Roman Emperor Constantine I (r. 306–337) summoned his son Constantine II from Gaul to campaign north of the Danube. In 332, in very cold weather, the Romans were victorious, killing 100,000 Goths and capturing Ariaricus, the son of the Gothic king. In their efforts to halt the Gothic expansion and replace it with their own on the north of Lower Danube (present-day Romania), the Sarmatians armed their "servants" Limigantes. After the Roman victory, however, the local population revolted against their Sarmatian masters, pushing them beyond the Roman border. Constantine, on whom the Sarmatians had called for help, defeated the Limigantes, and moved the Sarmatian population back in. In the Roman provinces, Sarmatian combatants enlisted in the Roman army, whilst the rest of the population sought refuge throughout Thrace, Macedonia and Italy. The Origo Constantini mentions 300,000 refugees resulting from this conflict. The Emperor Constantine was subsequently attributed the title of Sarmaticus Maximus.[50]

In the 4th and 5th centuries the Huns expanded and conquered both the Sarmatians and the Germanic tribes living between the Black Sea and the borders of the Roman Empire. From bases in modern-day Hungary, the Huns ruled the entire former Sarmatian territory. Their various constituents flourished under Hunnish rule, fought for the Huns against a combination of Roman and Germanic troops, and departed after the Battle of the Catalaunian Plains (451), the death of Attila (453) and the appearance of the Bulgar ruling elements west of the Volga.

Eventually the Proto-Slavic population of Eastern Europe decisively assimilated and absorbed the Sarmatians around the Early Middle Ages.[51][52] However, a related people to the Sarmatians, known as the Alans, survived in the North Caucasus into the Early Middle Ages, ultimately giving rise to the modern Ossetic ethnic group

Сармати су била конфедерација (вјероватно) иранских племена која је постојала у времену антике отприлике од 5. вијека п.н.е. до 4. вијека нове ере.
Територија коју су настањивали бјеше позната као Сарматија, укључивала би области данашње централне Украјине , југоисточне Украјине, јужне Русији , области око Волге и Јужног Урала , такође у мањој мјери сјевероисточни Балкан и простор Молдавије .
Сармати су сродни Скитима, од Скита су се разликовали по штовању бога ватре, а не бога природе, и важну улогу су имале и жене ратници, што је можда послужило као инспирација за Амазонке.
Будући да су велике дијелове данашње Русије, посебно земљу између планина Урал и ријеке Дон (антички Танаис, који у римској географији раздваја Европу и Азију), у 5. вијеку прије нове ере насељавали Сармати, тај простор се некад назива и "сарматском матицом".
Pogledajte prilog 905348
Kарта Римског царства за времена Хадријана (владао 117-138 год.н.е,) која показује тадашње пребивалиште Сармата

У историјским рукописима Сармате први помиње Херодот (овдје, књига четврта, поглавље Амазонке) под именом Сауромати и у свом препричавачком стилу пише да су настали спајањем скитских младића и Амазонки, тих жена ратница

те да говоре скитским језиком, али неправилним.

Иако је обично прихваћено да су "Сауромати" само друга варијанта имена Сармати, постоје историчари који су става да се не може успоставити директна линија развоја између ова два народа, Сауромата са каснијим Сарматима, док археолози уобичајено користе термин „sauromatian“ како би идентиkovали најранију фазу сарматске културе.
Клаудије Птоломеј је у свом трактату "Водич за географију" писао о европским и азијским Сарматима, чија је граница била између ријеке Танаис.
Амијан Маркелин (330-400. год. н.е.), описивајући Хуне, говори да ово племе живи око Азовског мора у правцу Леденог океана и да су дошли до земље Алана - државе древних Масагетија. Маркелин мисли да су источно од ријеке Дон на просторима Скитске пустиње, и Сармате да су сјеверно од Дунава. Из поменутог се види да Маркелин разликује Сармате од Алана који су се могли развити (?) из чувеног ратнилког племена Масагети.
У 5-4. вијеку прије н. е. Сармати су мирни комшије Скита. Скити су били трговци, ишли су у источне земље, па су им Сармати дозволили да пролазе кроз сарматске земље. У рату са Персијанцима Сармати су били поуздани савезници Скита. У вријеме Атеја, још увијек су били на снази савезнички односи, сарматски одреди су били на служби у војци и на двору скитског краља. Појединачне групе Сармата су се населиле на територији европске Скитије.
У 3. вијеку прије н. е. прекинути су пријатељски односи, отпочела су непријатељства и војни напади Сармата на Скитију. Агресивна борбеност младих сарматских савеза поклопила се са слабљењем скитског царства. На крају 4. вијека прије н. е, Скити су поражени од стране владара Тракије Лизимакса. Трачани и келтска племена Галаћани притисла су Ските на западу. Посљедица неуспјелог рата је био привредни пад и пада скитског утцаја међу освојеним земаљама и племенима.
Након освајања европских Скита, Сармати су стекли славу као најмоћнији народи старог вијека. Све источно од Европе, заједно са Кавказом је названо Сарматија. Пошто је основала доминацију у европским земљама, Сармати су почели да успостављавају мирољубиве трговачке договоре, па је дошло до трговине са грчким градовима у Црном мору.
У 1. вијеку нове ере, Сармати су почели нападати Римско царство у савезу са германска племенима
Почевши од 2. века п. н. е Сармати су се све чешће појављивали у грчким, римским списима и код оријенталних аутора. Страбон помиње сарматска племена Јазиге, Роксолане, Аорсе, Сираке и Алане.
Pogledajte prilog 905352
Опис војне моћи ових племена имамо у дјелу (овдје),цитат који је на другој теми приложио форумаш Slaven777

У 3. вијеку доминацију Сармата понтском степом прекинули су Готи.
Између 370. и 380. године, Хуни су напали Остроготе, а пре тога су напали Алане код Азовског мора.
Током инвазије Хуна у 4. стољећу, многи Сармати придружују се Готима и другим германским племенима (прије свих Вандалима) у насељу Западно Римско Царство.
Сармати по прелазу у рани средњи вијек полако нестају са историјске позорнице, вјероватно асимиловани у словенске народе источне Европе.

Толико у уводном посту, ако тема саживи, написаће се још која.

Moguće je da je Hekatej iz Mileta najstariji izvor o Sarmatima (dakle, pre Herodota). On pominje narod Iksibata u „Evropi”.

Iksibate, pleme kod Crnog mora na granici teritorije Sinda.

Hekatejeve Iksibate su vrlo moguće neki od ogranaka sarmatskog naroda.

 

[Scott Isle]

Sarmati su KOD NAS u Dalmaciji
AUTOTHTONI narod koji je
IMAO KRALJEVINU
u vrijeme Rima (Amijan Markelin, Rerum Gestarum)
i nakon pada Rima u Dalmaciji, od Save i Dunava na jug (Jordanes)
A prije tog naziva Sarmati, zvani su Mezi (Ana Komnena, Aleksijada)
i to znaci da su Sarmati kod nas Mezi i autohtoni od pamtivjeka, od prvih pomena naroda, od Homera.

Sarmati posto su Mezi su takodje bitni jer je naziv Sarmati kovanica od priloga Sar i naziva Mezi. To je bitno za naziv Srba i Srbije, jer su Srbi iz Bojke a kad je osnovana Kraljevina postali su Ser Boii. Da se radi o istom jezicnom prostoru od sjevera Panonije do Macedonije govore nazivi naroda kod recimo Plinija Starijeg gdje se unikatno kod nas nalaze narodi sa prilogom Ser u nazivu, kao Serretes, Serrapilli, Sarmati, Siropaiones. I to je dokaz da je ovde narod autohton.

 

[Pumpaj Dinstanović]

Sarmati su KOD NAS u Dalmaciji
AUTOTHTONI narod koji je
IMAO KRALJEVINU
u vrijeme Rima (Amijan Markelin, Rerum Gestarum)
i nakon pada Rima u Dalmaciji, od Save i Dunava na jug (Jordanes)
A prije tog naziva Sarmati, zvani su Mezi (Ana Komnena, Aleksijada)
i to znaci da su Sarmati kod nas Mezi i autohtoni od pamtivjeka, od prvih pomena naroda, od Homera.

Sarmati posto su Mezi su takodje bitni jer je naziv Sarmati kovanica od priloga Sar i naziva Mezi. To je bitno za naziv Srba i Srbije, jer su Srbi iz Bojke a kad je osnovana Kraljevina postali su Ser Boii. Da se radi o istom jezicnom prostoru od sjevera Panonije do Macedonije govore nazivi naroda kod recimo Plinija Starijeg gdje se unikatno kod nas nalaze narodi sa prilogom Ser u nazivu, kao Serretes, Serrapilli, Sarmati, Siropaiones. I to je dokaz da je ovde narod autohton.

Jesi li do toga došao čitajući Herodota, Diodora sa Sicilije, Pseudo-Skilaksa, Strabona, Plinija Starijeg, Pomponija Mele, Ptolemeja, Avgusta,..?

 

[Scott Isle]

Jesi li do toga došao čitajući Herodota, Diodora sa Sicilije, Pseudo-Skilaksa, Strabona, Plinija Starijeg, Pomponija Mele, Ptolemeja, Avgusta,..?

Ne lazi!

Sarmati su imali KRALJEVINU U VRIJEME RIMA, KOD NAS.

Ammianus Marcellinus, Rerum Gestarum
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:2007.01.0082:book=17:chapter=12

 

[Scott Isle]

Jesi li do toga došao čitajući Herodota, Diodora sa Sicilije, Pseudo-Skilaksa, Strabona, Plinija Starijeg, Pomponija Mele, Ptolemeja, Avgusta,..?

Sarmati su imali KRALJEVINU juzno od Save i Dunava do Nisa i Lipljana nakon pada Rima u Dalmaciji. Kod nas, odmah nakon pada Rima u Dalmaciji.

Jordanes, Origins and Deeds of the Goths
https://people.ucalgary.ca/~vandersp/Courses/texts/jordgeti.html

 

[Scott Isle]

Jesi li do toga došao čitajući Herodota, Diodora sa Sicilije, Pseudo-Skilaksa, Strabona, Plinija Starijeg, Pomponija Mele, Ptolemeja, Avgusta,..?

Ti Sarmati koji su imali Kraljevinu kod nas u Dalmaciji, u vrijeme Rima i nakon Rima, od pamtivjeka su Mezi!

Ana Komnena, Aleksijada

 

[Pumpaj Dinstanović]

Ne lazi!

Nisam izrekao nijedan stav, tako da ne može biti reči o lažima. Postavio sam pitanje.

Jesi li čitao ili ne?

 

[Pumpaj Dinstanović]

Herodot, IV knjiga (Melpomena), 27. glava:

21) Преко Танаиса не налази се више скитска област, него је ту прва сауроматска покрајина. Ови станују у области која се протеже од залива Меотског језера према северу петнаест дана хода, и у њој нема ни питомог ни дивљег дрвећа. Иза њих у другој покрајини станују Будини; и та је покрајина густо обрасла различитим дрвећем.

http://www.svetlost.org/podaci/herodot.pdf

Herodot, najstariji poznati pisani izvor koji ih izričito pominje, kaže da zemlja Sarmata počinje iza Dona i da se u kopno prodire 15 dana hoda od Azovskog mora. Susedi su im Budini (koji se neretko dovode u vezu sa precima pra-Slovena).

 

[Pumpaj Dinstanović]

Ti Sarmati koji su imali Kraljevinu kod nas u Dalmaciji, u vrijeme Rima i nakon Rima, od pamtivjeka su Mezi!

Ana Komnena, Aleksijada

Pogledajte prilog 905531

Reči Ane Komnine u XI stoleću, davno posle vremena o kojem govorimo, od mnogo manjeg značaja su od klasčnih istorijskih izvora i treba ih posmatrati u kontekstu vremena u kojem su nastali.

Komnina koristi arhaična imena; Skiti, Sarmati, Dačani,...za Pečenjege, Kumane, Mađare,...u ovom slučaju, konkretno, radi se o Turcima Oguzima. Pol Stivenson dobro pojašnjava (pp. 109):

Zašto za Oguze kaže Ana Komnina da su ranije nazvani Mižanima u Aleksijadi, vrlo je interesantno pitanje na koje treba dati odgovor. Ali ono je efemerno za polje ove teme i upotreba tog pasaža da se iskonstruiše hipoteza kako su Sarmati, tobože, izvorno iz Mizije, bilo bi neutemeljeno proizvoljno tumačenje.

 

[Khal Drogo]

Када су наши простори у питању свакако ваља поменути сарматско племе Јазиге (овдје) који су вјероватно дали допринос у каснијој етногенези балканских народа, укључујући и Србе.

Spojler: Iazyges

Iazyges

The Iazyges (/aɪˈæzɪdʒiːz/),[a] were an ancient Sarmatian tribe that traveled westward in c. 200 BC from Central Asia to the steppes of what is now Ukraine. In c. 44 BC, they moved into modern-day Hungary and Serbia near the Dacian steppe between the Danube and Tisza rivers, where they adopted a semi-sedentary lifestyle.

In their early relationship with Rome, the Iazyges were used as a buffer state between the Romans and the Dacians; this relationship later developed into one of overlord and client state, with the Iazyges being nominally sovereign subjects of Rome. Throughout this relationship, the Iazyges carried out raids on Roman land, which often caused punitive expeditions to be made against them.

Almost all of the major events of the Iazyges, such as the two Dacian Wars—in both of which the Iazyges fought, assisting Rome in subjugating the Dacians in the first war and conquering them in the second—are connected with war. Another such war is the Marcomannic War that occurred between 169 and 175, in which the Iazyges fought against Rome but were defeated by Marcus Aurelius and had severe penalties imposed on them.

Culture​

Although the Iazyges were nomads before their migration to the Tisza plain, they became semi-sedentary once there, and lived in towns,[4][5][6][7][8] although they migrated between these towns to allow their cattle to graze.[9][6][10] Their language was a dialect of Old Iranian, which was quite different from most of the other Sarmatian dialects of Old Iranian.[11] According to the Roman writer Gaius Valerius Flaccus, when an Iazyx became too old to fight in battle, they were killed by their sons[12][13] or, according to Roman geographer Pomponius Mela, threw themselves from a rock.[14]

Etymology​

The Iazyges' name was Latinized as Iazyges Metanastae (Ἰάζυγες Μετανάσται) or Jazyges,[15] or sometimes as Iaxamatae.[16] They were occasionally referred to as the Iazyigs, Iazygians, Iasians, Yazigs,[17] and Iazuges.[18] Several corruptions of these names, such as Jazamatae,[19] Iasidae,[20] Latiges, and Cizyges existed.[21] The root of the name may be Proto-Iranian *yaz-, "to sacrifice", perhaps indicating a caste or tribe specializing in religious sacrifices.[22]

According to Peter Edmund Laurent, a 19th-century French classical scholar, the Iazyges Metanastæ, a warlike Sarmatian race, which had migrated during the reign of the Roman Emperor Claudius, and therefore received the name of "Metanastæ", resided in the mountains west of the Theiss (Tisza) and east of the Gran (Hron) and Danube.[23] The Greek Metanastæ (Greek: Μετανάσται) means "migrants". The united Scythians and Sarmatæ called themselves Iazyges, which Laurent connected with Old Church Slavonic ѩзꙑкъ (językŭ, "tongue, language, people").[24]

Burial traditions​

The graves made by the Iazyges were often rectangular or circular,[26] although some were ovoid, hexagonal, or even octagonal.[25] They were flat and were grouped like burials in modern cemeteries.[27] Most of the graves' access openings face south, southeast, or southwest. The access openings are between 0.6 metres (2 ft 0 in) and 1.1 m (3 ft 7 in) wide. The graves themselves are between 5 m (16 ft) and 13 m (43 ft) in diameter.[25]

After their migration to the Tisza plain, the Iazyges were in serious poverty.[28] This is reflected in the poor furnishings found at burial sites, which are often filled with clay vessels, beads, and sometimes brooches. Iron daggers and swords were very rarely found in the burial site. Their brooches and arm-rings were of the La Tène type, showing the Dacians had a distinct influence on the Iazyges.[27] Later tombs showed an increase in material wealth; tombs of the 2nd to early 4th century had weapons in them 86% of the time and armor in them 5% of the time.[29] Iazygian tombs along the Roman border show a strong Roman influence.[30]

Diet​

The Iazyges used hanging, asymmetrical, barrel-shaped pots that had uneven weight distribution. The rope used to hang the pot was wrapped around the edges of the side collar; it is believed the rope was tied tightly to the pot, allowing it to spin in circles. Due to the spinning motion, there are several theories about the pot's uses. It is believed the small hanging pots were used to ferment alcohol using the seeds of touch-me-not balsam (Impatiens noli-tangere), and larger hanging pots were used to churn butter and make cheese.[31] The Iazyges were cattle breeders; they required salt to preserve their meat[32] but there were no salt mines within their territory.[33] According to Cassius Dio, the Iazyges received grain from the Romans.[34]

Military​

The Iazyges wore heavy armor, such as Sugarloaf helms,https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iazyges#cite_note-37[36] and scale armor made of iron, bronze, horn, or horse hoof, which was sewn onto a leather gown so the scales would partially overlap.[37][38][39][40] They used long, two-handed lances called Contus; they wielded these from horses, which they barded.[c][42] Their military was exclusively cavalry.[43] They are believed to have used saddle blankets on their horses.[44] Although it was originally Gaulic, it is believed the Iazyges used the Carnyx, a trumpet-like wind instrument.[45]

Religion​

One of the Iazygian towns, Bormanon, is believed to have had hot springs because settlement names starting with "Borm" were commonly used among European tribes to denote that the location had hot springs, which held religious importance for many Celtic tribes. It is not known, however, whether the religious significance of the hot springs was passed on to the Iazyges with the concept itself.[46] The Iazyges used horse-tails in their religious rituals.[47]

Economy​

When the Iazyges migrated to the plain between the Tisza and the Danube, their economy suffered severely. Many explanations have been offered for this, such as their trade with the Pontic Steppe and Black Sea being cut off and the absence of any mineable resources within their territory making their ability to trade negligible. Additionally, Rome proved more difficult to raid than the Iazyges' previous neighbors, largely due to Rome's well-organized army.[28][48][49] The Iazyges had no large-scale organized production of goods for most of their history.[50] As such, most of their trade goods were gained via small-scale raids upon neighboring peoples, although they did have some incidental horticulture.[51] Several pottery workshops have been found in Banat, which was within the territory of the Iazyges, close to their border with Rome. These pottery workshops were built from the late 3rd century and have been found at Vršac–Crvenka, Grădinari–Selişte, Timişoara–Freidorf, Timişoara–Dragaşina, Hodoni, Pančevo, Dolovo, and Izvin şi Jabuca.[52]

The Iazyges' trade with the Pontic Steppe and Black Sea was extremely important to their economy; after the Marcomannic War, Marcus Aurelius offered them the concession of movement through Dacia to trade with the Roxolani, which reconnected them with the Pontic Steppe trade network.[53][54] This trade route lasted until 260, when the Goths took over Tyras and Olbia, cutting off both the Roxolani's and the Iazyges' trade with the Pontic Steppe.[55] The Iazyges also traded with the Romans, although this trade was smaller in scale. While there are Roman bronze coins scattered along the entirety of the Roman Danubian Limes, the highest concentration of them appear in the Iazyges' territory.[56]

Imports​

Because the Iazyges had no organized production for most of their history, imported pottery finds are sparse. Some goods, such as bronze or silver vessels, amphorae, terracotta wares, and lamps are extremely rare or nonexistent. Some amphorae and lamps have been found in Iazygian territory, often near major river crossings near the border with Rome, but the location of the sites make it impossible to determine whether these goods are part of an Iazygain site, settlement, or cemetery; or merely the lost possessions of Roman soldiers stationed in or near the locations.[57]

The most commonly found imported ware was Terra sigillata. At Iazygian cemeteries, a single complete terra sigillata vessel and a large number of fragments have been found in Banat. Terra sigillata finds in Iazygian settlements are confusing in some cases; it can sometimes be impossible to determine the timeframe of the wares in relation to its area and thus impossible to determine whether the wares came to rest there during Roman times or after the Iazyges took control. Finds of terra sigillata of an uncertain age have been found in Deta, Kovačica–Čapaš, Kuvin, Banatska Palanka, Pančevo, Vršac, Zrenjanin–Batka, Dolovo, Delibata, Perlez, Aradac, Botoš, and Bočar. Finds of terra sigillata that have been confirmed to having been made the time of Iazygian possession but of uncertain date have been found in Timișoara–Cioreni, Hodoni, Iecea Mică, Timișoara–Freidorf, Satchinez, Criciova, Becicherecul Mic, and Foeni–Seliște. The only finds of terra sigillata whose time of origin is certain have been found in Timișoara–Freidorf, dated to the 3rd century AD. Amphorae fragments have been found in Timișoara–Cioreni, Iecea Mică, Timișoara–Freidorf, Satchinez, and Biled; all of these are confirmed to be of Iazygian origin but none of them have definite chronologies.[57]

In Tibiscum, an important Roman and later Iazygian settlement, only a very low percent of pottery imports were imported during or after the 3rd century. The pottery imports consisted of terra sigillata, amphorae, glazed pottery, and stamped white pottery. Only 7% of imported pottery was from the "late period" during or after the 3rd century, while the other 93% of finds were from the "early period", the 2nd century or earlier.[58] Glazed pottery was almost nonexistent in Tibiscum; the only finds from the early period are a few fragments with Barbotine decorations and stamped with "CRISPIN(us)". The only finds from the late period are a handful of glazed bowl fragments that bore relief decorations on both the inside and the outside. The most common type of amphorae is the Dressel 24 similis; finds are from the time of rule of Hadrian to the late period. An amphora of type Carthage LRA 4 dated between the 3rd and 4th century AD has been found in Tibiscum-Iaz and an amphora of type Opaiţ 2 has been found in Tibiscum-Jupa.[59]

Geography​

Records of eight Iazygian towns have been documented; these are Uscenum, Bormanum, Abinta, Trissum, Parca, Candanum, Pessium, and Partiscum.[23] There was also a settlement on Gellért Hill.[60] Their capital was at Partiscum, the site of which roughly corresponds with that of Kecskemét, a city in modern-day Hungary.[61][62] It is believed that a Roman road may have traversed the Iazyges' territory for about 200 miles (320 km),[63] connecting Aquincum to Porolissum, and passing near the site of modern-day Albertirsa.[64] This road then went on to connect with the Black Sea city states.[65]

The area of plains between the Danube and Tisza rivers that was controlled by the Iazyges was similar in size to Italy and about 1,000 mi (1,600 km) long.[66][67] The terrain was largely swampland dotted with a few small hills that was devoid of any mineable metals or minerals. This lack of resources and the problems the Romans would face trying to defend it may explain why the Romans never annexed it as a province but left it as a client-kingdom.[48][49]

According to English cartographer Aaron Arrowsmith, Iazyges Metanastæ lived east (sic) of the [Roman] Dacia separating it from [Roman] Pannonia and Germania.[68] Iazyges Metanastæ drove Daci from Pannonia and Tibiscus River (today known as Timiș River).[68]

History​

In the 3rd century BC the Iazyges lived in modern-day south-eastern Ukraine along the northern shores of the Sea of Azov, which the Ancient Greeks and Romans called the Lake of Maeotis. From there, the Iazyges —or at least some of them —moved west along the shores of the Black Sea into modern-day Moldova and south-western Ukraine.[70][71][72] It is possible the entirety of the Iazyges did not move west and that some of them stayed along the Sea of Azov, which would explain the occasional occurrence of the surname Metanastae; the Iazyges that possibly remained along the Sea of Azov, however, are never mentioned again.[73]

Early history​

In the 2nd century BC, sometime before 179 BC, the Iazyges began to migrate westward to the steppe near the Lower Dniester. This may have occurred because the Roxolani, who were the Iazyges' eastern neighbors, were also migrating westward due to pressure from the Aorsi, which put pressure on the Iazyges and forced them to migrate westward as well.[19][75][76]

The views of modern scholars as to how and when the Iazyges entered the Pannonian plain are divided. The main source of division is over the issue of if the Romans approved, or even ordered, the Iazyges to migrate, with both sides being subdivided into groups debating the timing of such a migration. Andreas Alföldi states that the Iazyges could not have been present to the north-east and east of the Pannonian Danube unless they had Roman approval. This viewpoint is supported by János Harmatta, who claims that the Iazyges were settled with both the approval and support of the Romans, so as to act as a buffer state against the Dacians. András Mócsy suggests that Gnaeus Cornelius Lentulus Augur, who was Roman consul in 26 BC, may have been responsible for the settlement of the Iazyges as a buffer between Pannonia and Dacia. However, Mócsy also suggests that the Iazyges may have arrived gradually, such that they initially were not noticed by the Romans. John Wilkes believes that the Iazyges reached the Pannonian plain either by the end of Augustus's rule (14 AD) or some time between 17 and 20 AD. Constantin Daicoviciu suggests that the Iazyges entered the area around 20 AD, after the Romans called upon them to be a buffer state. Coriolan Opreanu supports the theory of the Iazyges being invited, or ordered, to occupy the Pannonian plain, also around 20 AD.[77] Gheorghe Bichir and Ion Horațiu Crișan support the theory that the Iazyges first began to enter the Pannonian plain in large numbers under Tiberius, around 20 AD.[78] The most prominent scholars that state the Iazyges were not brought in by the Romans, or later approved, are Doina Benea, Mark Ščukin, and Jenő Fitz. Doina Benea states that the Iazyges slowly infiltrated the Pannonian plain sometime in the first half of the 1st century AD, without Roman involvement. Jenő Fitz promotes the theory that the Iazyges arrived en masse around 50 AD, although a gradual infiltration preceded it. Mark Ščukin states only that the Iazyges arrived by themselves sometime around 50 AD. Andrea Vaday argued against the theory of a Roman approved or ordered migration, citing the lack of strategic reasoning, as the Dacians were not actively providing a threat to Rome during the 20–50 AD period.[79]

The occupation of the lands between the Danube and Tisza by the Iazyges was mentioned by Pliny the Elder in his Naturalis Historia (77–79 AD), in which he says that the Iazyges inhabited the basins and plains of the lands, while the forested and mountainous area largely retained a Dacian population, which was later pushed back to the Tisza by the Iazyges. Pliny's statements are corroborated by the earlier accounts of Seneca the Younger in his Quaestiones Naturales (61–64 AD), where he uses the Iazyges to discuss the borders that separate the various peoples.[77]

From 78 to 76 BC, the Romans led an expedition to an area north of the Danube —then the Iazyges' territory —–because the Iazyges had allied with Mithridates VI of Pontus, with whom the Romans were at war.[80][81] In 44 BC King Burebista of Dacia died and his kingdom began to collapse. After this, the Iazyges began to take possession of the Pannonian Basin, the land between the Danube and Tisa rivers in modern-day south-central Hungary.[82] Historians have posited this was done at the behest of the Romans, who sought to form a buffer state between their provinces and the Dacians to protect the Roman province of Pannonia.[83][84][85][86][87][88] The Iazyges encountered the Basternae and Getae along their migration path sometime around 20 AD and turned southward to follow the coast of the Black Sea until they settled in the Danube Delta.[75] This move is attested by the large discrepancy in the location reported by Tacitus relative to that which was earlier given by Ovid.[89] Archeological finds suggest that while the Iazyges took hold of the northern plain between the Danube and the Tisa by around 50 AD, they did not take control of the land south of the Partiscum-Lugio line until the late 1st or early 2nd century.[90]

The effects of this migration have been observed in the ruins of burial sites left behind by the Iazyges; the standard grave goods made of gold being buried alongside a person were absent, as was the equipment of a warrior; this may have been because the Iazyges were no longer in contact with the Pontic Steppe and were cut off from all trade with them, which had previously been a vital part of their economy. Another problem with the Iazyges' new location was that it lacked both precious minerals and metals, such as iron, which could be turned into weapons. They found it was much more difficult to raid the Romans, who had organized armies around the area, as opposed to the disorganized armies of their previous neighbors. The cutting-off of trade with the Pontic Steppe meant they could no longer trade for gold for burial sites, assuming any of them could afford it. The only such goods they could find were the pottery and metals of the adjacent Dacian and Celtic peoples. Iron weapons would have been exceedingly rare, if the Iazyges even had them, and would likely have been passed down from father to son rather than buried because they could not have been replaced.[28]

During the time of Augustus, the Iazyges sent an embassy to Rome to request friendly relations.[40] In a modern context, these "friendly relations" would be similar to a non-aggression pact.[91] Later, during the reign of Tiberius, the Iazyges became one of many new client-tribes of Rome. Roman client states were treated according to the Roman tradition of patronage, exchanging rewards for service.[92][93] The client king was called socius et amicus Romani Populi (ally and friend of the Roman People); the exact obligations and rewards of this relationship, however, are vague.[94] Even after being made into a client state, the Iazyges conducted raids across their border with Rome, for example in 6 AD and again in 16 AD. In 20 AD the Iazyges moved westward along the Carpathians into the Pannonian Steppe, and settled in the steppes between the Danube and the Tisza river, taking absolute control of the territory from the Dacians.[75] In 50 AD, an Iazyges cavalry detachment assisted King Vannius, a Roman client-king of the Quadi, in his fight against the Suevi.[95][96]

In the Year of Four Emperors, 69 AD, the Iazyges gave their support to Vespasian, who went on to become the sole emperor of Rome.[97] The Iazyges also offered to guard the Roman border with the Dacians to free up troops for Vespasian's invasion of Italy; Vespasian refused, however, fearing they would attempt a takeover or defect. Vespasian required the chiefs of the Iazyges to serve in his army so they could not organize an attack on the undefended area around the Danube.[98][99][100][101][102] Vespasian enjoyed support from the majority of the Germanic and Dacian tribes.[97]

Domitian's campaign against Dacia was mostly unsuccessful; the Romans, however, won a minor skirmish that allowed him to claim it as a victory, even though he paid the King of Dacia, Decebalus, an annual tribute of eight million sesterces in tribute to end the war.[97][103] Domitian returned to Rome and received an ovation, but not a full triumph. Considering that Domitian had been given the title of Imperator for military victories 22 times, this was markedly restrained, suggesting the populace —–or at least the senate —was aware it had been a less-than-successful war, despite Domitian's claims otherwise.[104][d] In 89 AD, however, Domitian invaded the Iazyges along with the Quadi and Marcomanni. Few details of this war are known but it is recorded that the Romans were defeated,[106] it however known that Roman troops acted to repel simultaneous incursion by the Iazyges into Dacian lands.[107]

In early 92 AD the Iazyges, Roxolani, Dacians, and Suebi invaded the Roman province of Pannonia —modern-day Croatia, northern Serbia, and western Hungary.[108][104][109] Emperor Domitian called upon the Quadi and the Marcomanni to supply troops to the war. Both client-tribes refused to supply troops so Rome declared war upon them as well. In May 92 AD, the Iazyges annihilated the Roman Legio XXI Rapax in battle.[104][109][110] Domitian, however, is said to have secured victory in this war by January of the next year.[111] It is believed, based upon a rare Aureus coin showing an Iazyx with a Roman standard kneeling, with the caption of "Signis a Sarmatis Resitvtis", that the standard taken from the annihilated Legio XXI Rapax was returned to Rome at the end of the war.[112] Although the accounts of the Roman-Iazyges wars of 89 and 92 AD are both muddled, it has been shown they are separate wars and not a continuation of the same war.[113] The threat presented by the Iazyges and neighbouring people to the Roman provinces was significant enough that Emperor Trajan travelled across the Mid and Lower Danube in late 98 to early 99, where he inspected existing fortification and initiated the construction of more forts and roads.[107]

Tacitus, a Roman Historian, records in his book Germania, which was written in 98 AD, that the Osi tribes paid tribute to both the Iazyges and the Quadi, although the exact date this relationship began is unknown.[114]

During the Flavian dynasty, the princes of the Iazyges were trained in the Roman army, officially as an honor but in reality serving as a hostage, because the kings held absolute power over the Iazyges.[115] There were offers from the princes of the Iazyges to supply troops but these were denied because of the fear they might revolt or desert in a war.[116]

Dacian wars​

An alliance between the Iazyges and the Dacians led the Romans to focus more on the Danube than the Rhine.[117] This is shown by the placement of the Roman legions; during the time of Augustus's rule there were eight legions stationed along the Rhine, four stationed in Mainz, and another four in Cologne. Within a hundred years of Augustus' rule, however, Roman military resources had become centered along the Danube rather than the Rhine,[97] with nine legions stationed along the Danube and only one at the Rhine. By the time of Marcus Aurelius, however, twelve legions were stationed along the Danube.[117] The Romans also built a series of forts along the entire right bank of the Danube – from Germany to the Black Sea – and in the provinces of Rhaetia, Noricum, and Pannonia the legions constructed bridge-head forts. Later, this system was expanded to the lower Danube with the key castra of Poetovio, Brigetio, and Carnuntum. The Classis Pannonica and Classis Flavia Moesica were deployed to the right and lower Danube, respectively; they, however, had to overcome the mass of whirlpools and cataracts of the Iron Gates.[117]

First Dacian War​

Trajan, with the assistance of the Iazyges, led his legions[e] into Dacia against King Decebalus, in the year 101.[118][6] In order to cross the Danube with such a large army, Apollodorus of Damascus, the Romans' chief architect, created a bridge through the Iron Gates by cantilevering it from the sheer face of the Iron Gates. From this he created a great bridge with sixty piers that spanned the Danube. Trajan used this to strike deep within Dacia, forcing the king, Decebalus, to surrender and become a client king.[119]

Second Dacian War​

As soon as Trajan returned to Rome, however, Decebalus began to lead raids into Roman territory and also attacked the Iazyges, who were still a client-tribe of Rome.[120][121] Trajan concluded that he had made a mistake in allowing Decebalus to remain so powerful.[119] In 106 AD, Trajan again invaded Dacia, with 11 legions, and, again with the assistance of the Iazyges – [118][6]who were the only barbarian tribe that aided the Romans in this war – [f][123] and the only barbarian tribe in the Danube region which did not ally with Dacia.[123] The Iazyges were the only tribe to aid Rome in both Dacian Wars,[6][124] pushed rapidly into Dacia. Decebalus chose to commit suicide rather than be captured, knowing that he would be paraded in a triumph before being executed. In 113 AD Trajan annexed Dacia as a new Roman province, the first Roman province to the east of the Danube. Trajan, however, did not incorporate the steppe between the Tisza river and the Transylvanian mountains into the province of Dacia but left it for the Iazyges.[125] Back in Rome, Trajan was given a triumph lasting 123 days, with lavish gladiatorial games and chariot races. The wealth coming from the gold mines of Dacia funded these lavish public events and the construction of Trajan's Column, which was designed and constructed by Apollodorus of Damascus; it was 100 feet (30 m) tall and had 23 spiral bands filled with 2,500 figures, giving a full depiction of the Dacian war. Ancient sources say 500,000 slaves were taken in the war but moderns sources believe it was probably closer to 100,000 slaves.[126]

After the Dacian Wars​

Ownership of the region of Oltenia became a source of dispute between the Iazyges and the Roman empire. The Iazyges had originally occupied the area before the Dacians seized it; it was taken during the Second Dacian War by Trajan, who was determined to constitute Dacia as a province.[132][118][133] The land offered a more direct connection between Moesia and the new Roman lands in Dacia, which may be the reason Trajan was determined to keep it.[134] The dispute led to war in 107–108, where the future emperor Hadrian, then governor of Pannonia Inferior, defeated them.[132][118][135] The exact terms of the peace treaty are not known, but it is believed the Romans kept Oltenia in exchange for some form of concession, likely involving a one-time tribute payment.[118] The Iazyges also took possession of Banat around this time, which may have been part of the treaty.[136]

In 117, the Iazyges and the Roxolani invaded Lower Pannonia and Lower Moesia, respectively. The war was probably brought on by difficulties in visiting and trading with each other because Dacia lay between them. The Dacian provincial governor Gaius Julius Quadratus Bassus was killed in the invasion. The Roxolani surrendered first, so it is likely the Romans exiled and then replaced their client king with one of their choosing. The Iazyges then concluded peace with Rome.[137] The Iazyges and other Sarmatians invaded Roman Dacia in 123, likely for the same reason as the previous war; they were not allowed to visit and trade with each other. Marcius Turbo stationed 1,000 legionaries in the towns Potaissa and Porolissum, which the Romans probably used as the invasion point into Rivulus Dominarum. Marcius Turbo succeeded in defeating the Iazyges; the terms of the peace and the date, however, are not known.[138]

Marcomannic Wars​

See also: Marcomannic Wars

In 169, the Iazyges, Quadi, Suebi, and Marcomanni once again invaded Roman territory. The Iazyges led an invasion into Alburnum in an attempt to seize its gold mines.[139] The exact motives for and directions of the Iazyges' war efforts are not known.[140] Marcus Claudius Fronto, who was a general during the Parthian wars and then the governor of both Dacia and Upper Moesia, held them back for some time but was killed in battle in 170.[141] The Quadi surrendered in 172, the first tribe to do so; the known terms of the peace are that Marcus Aurelius installed a client-king Furtius on their throne and the Quadi were denied access to the Roman markets along the limes. The Marcomanni accepted a similar peace but the name of their client-king is not known.[142]

In 173, the Quadi rebelled and overthrew Furtius and replaced him with Ariogaesus, who wanted to enter into negotiations with Marcus. Marcus refused to negotiate because the success of the Marcomannic wars was in no danger.[142] At that point the Iazyges had not yet been defeated by Rome. having not acted, Marcus Aurelius appears to have been unconcerned, but when the Iazyges attacked across the frozen Danube in late 173 and early 174, Marcus redirected his attention to them. Trade restrictions on the Marcomanni were also partially lifted at that time; they were allowed to visit the Roman markets at certain times of certain days. In an attempt to force Marcus to negotiate, Ariogaesus began to support the Iazyges.[143] Marcus Aurelius put out a bounty on him, offering 1,000 aurei for his capture and delivery to Rome or 500 aurei for his severed head.[144][h] After this, the Romans captured Ariogaesus but rather than executing him, Marcus Aurelius sent him into exile.[146]

In the winter of 173, the Iazyges launched a raid across the frozen Danube but the Romans were ready for pursuit and followed them back to the Danube. Knowing the Roman legionaries were not trained to fight on ice, and that their own horses had been trained to do so without slipping, the Iazyges prepared an ambush, planning to attack and scatter the Romans as they tried to cross the frozen river. The Roman army, however, formed a solid square and dug into the ice with their shields so they would not slip. When the Iazyges could not break the Roman lines, the Romans counter-attacked, pulling the Iazyges off of their horses by grabbing their spears, clothing, and shields. Soon both armies were in disarray after slipping on the ice and the battle was reduced to many brawls between the two sides, which the Romans won. After this battle the Iazyges – and presumably the Sarmatians in general – were declared the primary enemy of Rome.[147]

The Iazyges surrendered to the Romans in March or early April of 175.[148][149][150] Their prince Banadaspus had attempted peace in early 174 but the offer was refused and Banadaspus was deposed by the Iazyges and replaced with Zanticus.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iazyges#cite_note-160[143] The terms of the peace treaty were harsh; the Iazyges were required to provide 8,000 men as auxiliaries and release 100,000 Romans they had taken hostage,[j] and were forbidden from living within ten Roman miles (roughly 9 miles (14 km) of the Danube. Marcus had intended to impose even harsher terms; it is said by Cassius Dio that he wanted to entirely exterminate the Iazyges[153] but was distracted by the rebellion of Avidius Cassius.[143] During this peace deal, Marcus Aurelius broke from the Roman custom of Emperors sending details of peace treaties to the Roman Senate; this is the only instance in which Marcus Aurelius is recorded to have broken this tradition.[154] Of the 8,000 auxiliaries, 5,500 of them were sent to Britannia[155] to serve with the Legio VI Victrix,[156] suggesting that the situation there was serious; it is likely the British tribes, seeing the Romans being preoccupied with war in Germania and Dacia, had decided to rebel. All of the evidence suggests the Iazyges' horsemen were an impressive success.[155] The 5,500 troops sent to Britain were not allowed to return home, even after their 20-year term of service had ended.[157] After Marcus Aurelius had beaten the Iazyges; he took the title of Sarmaticus in accordance with the Roman practice of victory titles.[158]

After the Marcomannic Wars​

In 177, the Iazyges, the Buri, and other Germanic tribes[k] invaded Roman territory again.[54] It is said that in 178, Marcus Aurelius took the bloody spear from the Temple of Bellona and hurled it into the land of the Iazyges.[160] In 179, the Iazyges and the Buri were defeated, and the Iazyges accepted peace with Rome. The peace treaty placed additional restrictions on the Iazyges but also included some concessions. They could not settle on any of the islands of the Danube and could not keep boats on the Danube. They were, however, permitted to visit and trade with the Roxolani throughout the Dacian Province with the knowledge and approval of its governor, and they could trade in the Roman markets at certain times on certain days.[54][161] In 179, the Iazyges and the Buri joined Rome in their war against the Quadi and the Marcomanni after they secured assurances that Rome would prosecute the war to the end and not quickly make a peace deal.[162]

As part of a treaty made in 183, Commodus forbade the Quadi and the Marcomanni from waging war against the Iazyges, the Buri, or the Vandals, suggesting that at this time all three tribes were loyal client-tribes of Rome.[163][164] In 214, however, Caracalla led an invasion into the Iazyges' territory.[165] In 236, the Iazyges invaded Rome but were defeated by Emperor Maximinus Thrax, who took the title Sarmaticus Maximus following his victory.[166] The Iazyges, Marcomanni, and Quadi raided Pannonia together in 248,[167][168] and again in 254.[169] It is suggested the reason for the large increase in the amount of Iazyx raids against Rome was that the Goths led successful raids, which emboldened the Iazyges and other tribes.[170] In 260, the Goths took the cities of Tyras and Olbia, again cutting off the Iazyges' trade with the Pontic Steppe and the Black Sea.[55] From 282 to 283, Emperor Carus lead a successful campaign against the Iazyges.[169][171]

The Iazyges and Carpi raided Roman territory in 293, and Diocletian responded by declaring war.[172] From 294 to 295, Diocletian waged war upon them and won.[173][174] As a result of the war, some of the Carpi were transported into Roman territory so they could be controlled.[175] From 296 to 298, Galerius successfully campaigned against the Iazyges.[176][171] In 358, the Iazyges were at war with Rome.[177] In 375, Emperor Valentinian had a stroke in Brigetio while meeting with envoys from the Iazyges.[l][179] Around the time of the Gothic migration, and most intensely during the reign of Constantine I, a series of earthworks known as the Devil's Dykes (Ördögárok) was built around the Iazyges' territory.[180]

Late history and legacy​

In late antiquity, historic accounts become much more diffuse and the Iazyges generally cease to be mentioned as a tribe.[181][182] Beginning in the 4th century, most Roman authors cease to distinguish between the different Sarmatian tribes, and instead refer to all as Sarmatians.[183] In the late 4th century, two Sarmatian peoples were mentioned ––the Argaragantes and the Limigantes, who lived on opposite sides of the Tisza river. One theory is that these two tribes were formed when the Roxolani conquered the Iazyges, after which the Iazyges became the Limigantes and the Roxolani became the Argaragantes.[181][182] Another theory is that a group of Slavic tribesmen who gradually migrated into the area were subservient to the Iazyges; the Iazyges became known as the Argaragantes and the Slavs were the Limigantes.[184] Yet another theory holds that the Roxolani were integrated into the Iazyges.[185] Regardless of which is true, in the 5th century both tribes were conquered by the Goths[186][187][188][189] and, by the time of Attila, they were absorbed into the Huns.[190]

Foreign policy​

The Roman Empire​

During the 1st century, Rome used diplomacy to secure their northern borders, especially on the Danube, by way of befriending the tribes, and by sowing distrust amongst the tribes against each other.[191] Rome defended their Danubian border not just by way of repelling raids, but also by levying diplomatic influence against the tribes, and launching punitive expeditions.[192][193][194] The combination of diplomatic influence and swift punitive expeditions allowed the Romans to force the various tribes, including the Iazyges, into becoming client states of the Roman Empire.[194] Even after the Romans abandoned Dacia, they consistently projected their power north of the Danube against the Sarmatian tribes, especially during the reigns of Constantine, Constantius II, and Valentinian.[195] To this end, Constantine constructed a permanent bridge across the middle Danube in order to improve logistics for campaigns against the Goths and Sarmatians.[194][196]

Another key part of the relationship between the Roman Empire and the Sarmatian tribes was the settling of tribes in Roman lands, with emperors often accepting refugees from the Sarmatian tribes into nearby Roman territory.[197] When the Huns arrived in the Russian steppes and conquered the tribes that were there, they often lacked the martial ability to force the newly conquered tribes to stay, leading to tribes like the Greuthungi, Vandals, Alans, and Goths migrating and settling within the Roman Empire rather than remaining subjects of the Huns.[198] The Roman Empire benefited from accepting these refugee tribes, and thus continued to allow them to settle, even after treaties were made with Hunnic leaders such as Rugila and Attila that stipulated that the Roman Empire would reject all refugee tribes, with rival or subject tribes of the Huns being warmly received by Roman leaders in the Balkans.[199]

Roxolani​

The Iazyges also had a strong relationship with the Roxolani, another Sarmatian tribe, both economically and diplomatically.[54][161][194][135] During the second Dacian War, where the Iazyges supported the Romans, while the Roxolani supported the Dacians, the Iazyges and Roxolani remained neutral to each other.[200] After the Roman annexation of Dacia, the two tribes were effectively isolated from each other, until the 179 peace concession from Emperor Marcus Aurelius which permitted the Iazyges and Roxolani to travel through Dacia, subject to the approval of the governor.[54][161][194] Because of the new concession allowing them to trade with the Roxolani they could, for the first time in several centuries, trade indirectly with the Pontic Steppe and the Black Sea.[53] It is believed the Iazyges traveled through Small Wallachia until they reached the Wallachian Plain, but there is little archeological evidence to prove this.[201] Cypraea shells began to appear in this area in the last quarter of the 2nd century.[202]

Јазиги су били једно од сарматских племена, које је битисало између Тисе и Дунава, на подручју данашње Бачке, где су се доселили у првом веку нове ере, из области ријеке Дњепра.

Прије доласка Јазига, област између Дунава и Тисе била је насељена Дачанима. Током првих деценија 1. вијека, прешавши Карпате, Јазиги заузимају подручје између Тисе и Дунава, потискујући Дачане са овог подручја на исток преко ријеке Тисе, док преостало становништво подпада под њихову власт. Средином 1. века, Јазиги долазе на Дунаву, који је био граница Римског царства, у сукоб са римским легијама. Са Јазигима је ратовао римски цар Домицијан (89. и 92. године), а од времена цара Трајана, били су на страни Римљана. Послије 117. године, упадају у римске провинције Мезију и Панонију.

Са Јазигима се борио и цар Марко Аурелије (161-180), који је спречио њихову даљу експанзију. Пошто су их Римљани 174. године потукли, ступили су у службу Рима, а морали су да врате стотине хиљада римских заробљеника, те да ставе Римљанима на располагање осам хиљада коњаника, за ратовање у западној Европи. Већи део ових коњаника завршио је у Британији, гдје ће неки британски историчари наћи везу са легендомокраљу Артуру и његовим витезовима, те да су ови у ствари Сармати у служби Рима са наших простора,штоби серекло, наши људи.

Римска офензивана Јазиге 174-5.године

У III вијеку, 271.године, Римљани се услијед најезде Гота, повлаче из провинције Дакије а Готи су, у IV вijеку, поробили и Јазиге настањене на простору данашње Бачке. Након Константинове побједе над Готима, Јазиги се ослабађају готске доминације ипостају самостални
Такође, током трећег вијека, међу Јазиге се досељава нови талас Сармата са истока, који постају нови владајући сталеж. Према неким изворима, Јазиги из првог таласа су тада чинили средњи сталеж, док су нижи слој чинили покорени старосједиоци. У IV вијеку, међу Јазигима је избио грађански рат, епилог бјеше да је племе, Ардагарати побјегло дјелимично Готима, а дкелимично Римљанима.

У врijеме најезде Хуна на ово подручје крајем IV века, Јазиги нестају са историјске сцене. Претпоставља се да су се Јазиги претопили у друге народе, Готе и словенске народе. Приликом византијског посланства Атили 449.године, члан посланства Приск који је оставио рукопис, не помиње Јазиге.

Након Атилине смрти 453.године Сармати са пребивалиштем на простору Балкану, гдје би Јазиги могли чинити значаја дио, се ослобађају хунске власти. Око године 470. ови Сармати под краљевима Бенком и Бабајем ,се удружује са Свевима, Скирима, Гепидима и Ругијцима у борби против Гота али ће им Готи предвођени браћом Теудимером и Видимиером у Панонији нанијети катастрофалан пораз.
Ове догађаје описује Јорданес у свом рукопису на овим страницама.
Након двије године, око године 472. Теодорик, син Теудимеров, тада у доби од тек око 18 година наноси нови пораз Сарматима, гину оба поменута краља, Бенка и Бабај, и те догађаје описује Јорданес у другом рукопису поглавља 55 и 56

LV (280) After a certain time, when the wintry cold was at hand, the river Danube was frozen over as usual. For a river like this freezes so hard that it will support like a solid rock an army of foot-soldiers and wagons and carts and whatsoever vehicles there may be,--nor is there need of skiffs and boats. So when Thiudimer, king of the Goths, saw that it was frozen, he led his army across the Danube and appeared unexpectedly to the Suavi from the rear. Now this country of the Suavi has on the east the Baiovari, on the west the Franks, on the south the Burgundians and on the north the Thuringians. (281) With the Suavi there were present the Alamanni, then their confederates, who also ruled the Alpine heights, whence several streams flow into the Danube, pouring in with a great rushing sound. Into a place thus fortified King Thiudimer led his army in the winter-time and conquered, plundered and almost subdued the race of the Suavi as well as the Alamanni, who were mutually banded together. Thence he returned as victor to his own home in Pannonia and joyfully received his son Theodoric, once given as hostage to Constantinople and now sent back by the Emperor Leo with great gifts. (282) Now Theodoric had reached man's estate, for he was eighteen years of age and his boyhood was ended. So he summoned certain of his father's adherents and took to himself from the people his friends and retainers,--almost six thousand men. With these he crossed the Danube, without his father's knowledge, and marched against Babai, king of the Sarmatians, who had just won a victory over Camundus, a general of the Romans, and was ruling with insolent pride. Theodoric came upon him and slew him, and taking as booty his slaves and treasure, returned victorious to his father. Next he invaded the city of Singidunum, which the Sarmatians themselves had seized, and did not return it to the Romans, but reduced it to his own sway.

LVI (285) But Thiudimer, the elder brother, crossed the river Savus with his men, threatening the Sarmatians and their soldiers with war if any should resist him. From fear of this they kept quiet; moreover they were powerless in the face of so great a host. Thiudimer, seeing prosperity everywhere awaiting him, invaded Naissus, the first city of Illyricum. He was joined by his son Theodoric and the Counts Astat and Invilia, and sent them to Ulpiana by way of Castrum Herculis. (286) Upon their arrival the town surrendered, as did Stobi later; and several places of Illyricum, inaccessible to them at first, were thus made easy of approach. For they first plundered and then ruled by right of war Heraclea and Larissa, cities of Thessaly. But Thiudimer the king, perceiving his own good fortune and that of his son, was not content with this alone, but set forth from the city of Naissus, leaving only a few men behind as a guard. He himself advanced to Thessalonica, where Hilarianus the Patrician, appointed by the Emperor, was stationed with his army. (287) When Hilarianus beheld Thessalonica surrounded by an entrenchment and saw that he could not resist attack, he sent an embassy to Thiudimer the king and by the offer of gifts turned him aside from destroying the city. Then the Roman general entered upon a truce with the Goths and of his own accord handed over to them those places they inhabited, namely Cyrrhus, Pella, Europus, Methone, Pydna, Beroea, and another which is called Dium. (288) So the Goths and their king laid aside their arms, consented to peace and became quiet. Soon after these events, King Thiudimer was seized with a mortal illness in the city of Cyrrhus. He called the Goths to himself, appointed Theodoric his son as heir of his kingdom and presently departed this life.

Након тога Сарматима се губи траг на историјској позорници.

 

[Pumpaj Dinstanović]

Reči Ane Komnine u XI stoleću, davno posle vremena o kojem govorimo, od mnogo manjeg značaja su od klasčnih istorijskih izvora i treba ih posmatrati u kontekstu vremena u kojem su nastali.

Komnina koristi arhaična imena; Skiti, Sarmati, Dačani,...za Pečenjege, Kumane, Mađare,...u ovom slučaju, konkretno, radi se o Turcima Oguzima. Pol Stivenson dobro pojašnjava (pp. 109):

Pogledajte prilog 905647

Zašto za Oguze kaže Ana Komnina da su ranije nazvani Mižanima u Aleksijadi, vrlo je interesantno pitanje na koje treba dati odgovor. Ali ono je efemerno za polje ove teme i upotreba tog pasaža da se iskonstruiše hipoteza kako su Sarmati, tobože, izvorno iz Mizije, bilo bi neutemeljeno proizvoljno tumačenje.

Anin izvor za ovaj upad tzv. „Sarmata” koje su nekada, navodno, nazivali „Mižanima”:

67. By appointing such a man as Michael's successor, therefore, the emperor paid a compliment to the late Patriarch. I will now deal with the barbarians. In the east Isaac put an end to their incursions; in that part of the world the task proved to be well within his power. Now he proceeded to march in full force against the western barbarians. In the old days they had been called Mysians, but later their name was changed to its present form. They live in all countries divided from the Roman Empire by the River Danube. Suddenly they left these districts and emigrated to our side of the river. This movement areas caused by the activities of the Getae, their neighbors, who by their plundering and ravaging compelled them to abandon their own homes and seek new ones. So, at a time when the Ister was frozen over, they crossed as though on dry land and emigrated from the Trans-danubian territories to our province. The whole nation was transported, bag and baggage, over our borders, incapable of living at peace themselves, and bound to spread consternation among their former neighbors.

https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/basis/psellus-chrono07.asp

Edgar Sjuter, prevodilac i priređivač Pselove Hronografije u fusnotici kaže da se ovaj događaj iz 1059. godine po svemu sudeći odnosi na Pečenjege, ali ga ispravlja decidno tvrdeći da se tu radi o Oguzima.

Zašto ih je Mihailo Psel prozvao Mižanima, pre nego što su u novija vremena dobili sarmatsko ime, interesantno je pitanje.

Ako bih se kladio, ovako sad na prvu pamet govoreći, pošto je Mizija u Aziji na taj način termin bi možda mogao u ovom slučaju simbolizovati njihovo izvorno istočnjačko poreklo.

Tu svakako nije reč o Sarmatima, u drugoj polovini XI stoleća, te nije od sušinskog značaja ukoliko nam je cilj da pokušamo utvrditi etiološku pozadinu tog naroda. Treba se obratiti antičkim izvorima, savremenim i bliskim toj epohi, a u ovom slučaju, hvala bogu, nemamo ih nemali broj.

 

[Scott Isle]

Zašto za Oguze kaže Ana Komnina da su ranije nazvani Mižanima u Aleksijadi, vrlo je interesantno pitanje na koje treba dati odgovor. Ali ono je efemerno za polje ove teme i upotreba tog pasaža da se iskonstruiše hipoteza kako su Sarmati, tobože, izvorno iz Mizije, bilo bi neutemeljeno proizvoljno tumačenje.

Ana Komnina je IZVOR i daje DEFINICIJU!!! Po definiciji, Sarmati kod nas su Sarmezi i od pamtivjeka Mezi.
I to se SLAZE SA SVIM IZVORIMA! Na vasu banditsku zalost.

 

[Pumpaj Dinstanović]

Ana Komnina je IZVOR i daje DEFINICIJU!!! Po definiciji, Sarmati kod nas su Sarmezi i od pamtivjeka Mezi.
I to se SLAZE SA SVIM IZVORIMA! Na vasu banditsku zalost.

Da se slaže sa svim izvorima, ne bi (vrlo je transparentno) vidno prećutao na pitanje da li si u životu otvorio preko korpus čitave kapitalne građe o Sarmatima, jer je vrlo očigledno da si istrgnuo iz konteksta nešto na šta si naleteo na internetu i celu svoju priču iskonstruisao oko toga...tako da...ćuti, bolje ti je.

 

[Pumpaj Dinstanović]

Evo šta kaže i Borislav Raojčić na temu parcijalnih prevoda Pselove Hronografije:

Vezano za upade 1064. godine (za cara Konstantina X), Radojčić se priklanja tradicionalnom tumačenju da se iza Mižana kriju Pečenjezi, a za Tribale zapravo kaže da su Oguzi. Vrlo interesantno.

Ako su ipak Mižani oguski Turci, kako dosta dobro poentira Stivenson...ko bi bili Tribali?

 

[Scott Isle]

Nikoga nije briga sta kaze Bozidar Rajovcic.

IZVORI!!! Samo izvori!

 

[Pumpaj Dinstanović]

Nikoga nije briga sta kaze Bozidar Rajovcic.

IZVORI!!! Samo izvori!

Tačno. Zagrij dupe i samo napred: izvori, izvori i izvori. Počni od Herodota. I onda kada iščitaš, vrati se ovamo.

 

[psmaniac]

Herodot, IV knjiga (Melpomena), 27. glava:

21) Преко Танаиса не налази се више скитска област, него је ту прва сауроматска покрајина. Ови станују у области која се протеже од залива Меотског језера према северу петнаест дана хода, и у њој нема ни питомог ни дивљег дрвећа. Иза њих у другој покрајини станују Будини; и та је покрајина густо обрасла различитим дрвећем.

http://www.svetlost.org/podaci/herodot.pdf

Herodot, najstariji poznati pisani izvor koji ih izričito pominje, kaže da zemlja Sarmata počinje iza Dona i da se u kopno prodire 15 dana hoda od Azovskog mora. Susedi su im Budini (koji se neretko dovode u vezu sa precima pra-Slovena).

Пошто Момчило није ту, ево ја да питам. Могу ли се поистоветити Сауромати и Сармати?

 

[Pumpaj Dinstanović]

Пошто Момчило није ту, ево ја да питам. Могу ли се поистоветити Сауромати и Сармати?

Pretpostavljam?

 

[Khal Drogo]

Још један народ на овим просторима који завређује пажњу,јесу Лимиганти (овдје)
Лимиганти, звани још и Сармати робови (лат. Sarmatae servi) били су народ који је битисао на подручју данашње Србије (Бачке и Баната) у античко доба. Настањивали су долину Тисе, тада непроходно мочварно подручје,до њеног ушћа у Дунав. Етнички идентитет је предмет расправа, најприхваћеније је да су били сарматско племе.

На историјској позорници у рукописима се појављују око 334. године, када су се побунили против својих господара, тзв. Слободних Сармата (лат. Sarmatae liberi), и протјерали их. Нападали су и пљачкали Мезију, римско подручје преко Дунава.

Године 357. због учесталих упада Лимиганата у Мезију, цар Констанције II интервенише.Сакупивши легије код данашњег Старог Сланкамена, прелази Дунав, и на десној обали Тисе у крвавој бици побјеђује Лимиганте.
Поушао је у неколико наврата да их пресели сјеверније на варварске територије, но ти покушаји нису уродили плодом, покушалосе успоставити примирје, услијед напетости међу војскама долази до окршаја, у беспоштедној борби Лимиганти су савладани,један дио се спашава препливавши Тису, покушавају наћи спас у мочварама (ПС; тадашња Панонија није имала данашњи изглед већ бјеше једно огромно шумско пространство испреплетено мочварама), но Римљани,заправо сарматски плаћеници у римској војсци их прогоне и налазе, у коначници приморавају да напусте свој завичај.
Лимиганти се убрзо враћају у мочваре око Тисе и настављајуи да нападају и пљачкају околна подручја, прелазећи и на римскитериториј.
Овај пута године 359. Констанције мијења приступ, састаје се са Лимигантима покушајући да их придобије за најамникеи федерате.
Ствари су пошле по злу, покушан је и атентат на цара, што ће имати епилог у општем покољу овог народа.
Ове догађаје описује Амијан Марелин у 17.књизи, 13.поглавље (ovdje)

Spojler: Ammianus Marcellinus, book XVII, chapter 13

Constantius Augustus compels the Limigantes, former slaves of the Sarmatians, after inflicting great bloodshed upon them, to leave their abodes; then he addresses his soldiers.

---

When these events had been brought to a successful issue, as has been told, the public welfare required that the standards quickly be transported to the Limigantes, former slaves of the Sarmatians, 1 for it was most shameful that they had with impunity committed many infamous outrages. For as if forgetting the past, when the free Sarmatians rebelled, those others also found the opportunity most favourable and broke over the Roman frontier, for this outrage alone making common cause with their masters and enemies.
[2] Nevertheless, it was determined after driving out their former masters; according to others, the Limigantes were a tribe of the Sarmatians. after deliberation that this act also should be punished less severely than the heinousness of their crimes demanded, and vengeance was confined to transferring them to remote places, where they would lose the opportunity of molesting our territories; yet the consciousness of their long series of misdeeds warned them to fear danger.
[3] Accordingly, suspecting that the weight of war would be directed against them, they got ready wiles and arms and entreaties. But at the first sight of our army, as if smitten by a stroke of lightning and anticipating the utmost, after having pleaded for life they promised a yearly tribute, a levy of their able youth, and slavery; but they were ready, as they showed by gestures and expression, to refuse if they should be ordered to move elsewhere, trusting to the protection of the situation in which they had established themselves in security, after driving out their masters.
[4] For the Parthiscus 2 rushing into those lands with winding course, mingles with the Hister. 3 But while it flows alone and unconfined, it slowly traverses a long expanse of broad plain; near its mouth, however, it compresses this into a narrow tract, thus protecting those who dwell there from a Roman attack by the channel of the Danube, and making them safe from the inroads of other savages by the opposition of its own stream; for the greater part of the country is of a marshy nature, and since it is flooded when the rivers rise, is full of pools and overgrown with willows, and therefore impassable except for those well acquainted with the region. Besides this the larger river, enclosing the winding circuit of an island, which almost reaches the mouth [p. 385] of the Parthiscus, separates it from connection with the land
[5] So, at the emperor's request, they came with their native arrogance to their bank of the river, not, as the event proved, intending to do what they were bidden, but in order not to appear to have feared the presence of the soldiers; and there they stood defiantly, thus giving the impression that they had come there to reject any orders that might be given.
[6] But the emperor, suspecting that this might happen, had secretly divided his army into several bands, and with swift speed enclosed them, while they were delaying, within the lines of his own soldiers; then standing with a few followers on a loftier mound, protected by the defence of his guards, in mild terms he admonished them not to be unruly.
[7] But they, wavering in uncertainty of mind, were distracted different ways, and with mingled craft and fury they thought both of entreaties and of battle; and preparing to sally out on our men where we lay near to them, they purposely threw forward their shields a long way, so that by advancing step by step to recover them they might without any show of treachery gain ground by stealth.
[8] When the day was now declining to evening and the waning light warned them to do away with delay, the soldiers lifted up their standards and rushed upon them in a fiery attack. Thereupon the foe massed themselves together, and, huddled in close order, directed all their attack against the emperor himself, who, as was said, stood on higher ground, charging upon him with fierce looks and savage cries.
[9] The furious madness of this onset so angered our army that it could not brook it, and as the savages hotly menaced the emperor (as was said), they took the form of a wedge (an order which the soldier's naive parlance calls “the pig's head,”） 4 and scattered them with a hot charge; then on the right our infantry slaughtered the bands of their infantry, while on the left our cavalry poured into the nimble squadrons of their cavalry.
[10] The praetorian cohort, which stood before Augustus and was carefully guarding him, fell upon the breasts of the resisting foe, and then upon their backs as they took flight. And the savages with invincible stubbornness showed as they fell, by their awful shrieking, that they did not so much resent death as the triumph of our soldiers; and besides the dead many lay about hamstrung and thus deprived of the means of flight, others had their right hands cut off, some were untouched by any steel but crushed by the weight of those who rushed over them; but all bore their anguish in deep silence.
[11] And amid their varied torments not a single man asked for pardon or threw down his weapon, or even prayed for a speedy death, but they tightly grasped their weapons, although defeated, and thought it less shameful to be overcome by an enemy's strength than by the judgement of their own conscience, 5 while sometimes they were heard to mutter that what befell them was due to fortune, not to their deserts. Thus in the course of half an hour the decision of this battle was reached, and so many savages met a sudden death that the victory alone showed that there had been a fight.
[12] Hardly yet had the hordes of the enemy been laid low, when the kinsfolk of the slain, dragged from their humble cots, were led forth in droves without regard to age or sex, and abandoning the haughtiness of their former life, were reduced to the abjectness of servile submission; and only a brief space of time had elapsed, when heaps of slain and throngs of captives were to be seen.
[13] Then, excited by the heat of battle and the fruits of victory, our soldiers roused themselves to destroy those who had deserted the battle or were lurking in concealment in their huts. And these, when the soldiers had come to the spot thirsting for the blood of the savages, they butchered after tearing to pieces the light straw; 6 and no house, even though built with the stoutest of timbers, saved a single one from the danger of death.
[14] Finally, when everything was in flames and none could longer hide, since every means of saving their lives was cut off, they either fell victims to fire in their obstinacy, or, fleeing the flames and coming out to avoid one torture, fell by the enemy's steel.
[15] Yet some escaped the weapons and the fires, great as they were, and plunged into the depths of the neighbouring river, hoping through skill in swimming to be able to reach the opposite banks; of these the most lost their lives by drowning, others were pierced by darts and perished, in such numbers that the whole course of the immense river foamed with the blood that flowed everywhere in abundance. 7 Thus with the aid of two elements the wrath and valour of the victors annihilated the Sarmatians.
[16] Then it was decided, after this course of events, that every hope and comfort of life should be taken from all, and after their homes had been burned and their families carried off, orders were given that boats should be brought together, for the purpose of hunting down those whom the opposite bank had kept aloof from our army.
[17] And at once, for fear that the ardour of the warriors might cool, light-armed troops were put into skiffs, and taking the course which offered the greatest secrecy, came upon the lurking-places of the Sarmatians; and the enemy were deceived as they suddenly came in sight, seeing their native boats and the manner of rowing of their own country.
[18] But when from the glittering of the weapons afar off they perceived that what they feared was approaching, they took refuge in marshy places; but the soldiers, following them still more mercilessly, slew great numbers of them, and gained a victory in a place where it seemed impossible to keep a firm footing or venture upon any action.
[19] After the Amicenses 8 had been scattered and all but wholly destroyed, the army immediately attacked the Picenses, 9 so named from the adjoining regions, who had been put on their guard by the disasters to their allies, which were known from persistent rumours. To subdue these (for it was hard to pursue them, since they were scattered in divers places, and unfamiliarity with the roads was a hindrance) they resorted to the help of the Taifali 10 and likewise of the free Sarmatians.
[20] And as consideration of the terrain made it desirable to separate the troops of the allies, our soldiers chose the tracts near Moesia, the Taifali undertook those next to their own homes, and the [p. 393] free Sarmatians occupied the lands directly opposite to them.
[21] The Limigantes 11 having now suffered this fate, and terrified by the example of those who had been conquered and suddenly slain, hesitated long with wavering minds whether to die or plead, since for either course they had lessons of no slight weight; finally, however, the urgency of an assembly of the older men prevailed, and the resolve to surrender. Thus to the laurels of various victories there was added also the entreaties of those who had usurped freedom by arms; and such of them as survived bowed their necks with prayers before their former masters, whom they had despised as vanquished and weak, but now saw to be the stronger.
[22] And so, having received a safe-conduct, the greater number of them forsook the defence of the mountains and hastened to the Roman camp, pouring forth over the broad and spacious plains with their parents, their children and wives, and as many of their poor possessions as haste allowed them to snatch up in time.
[23] And those who (as it was supposed) would rather lose their lives than be compelled to change their country, since they believed mad licence to be freedom, now consented to obey orders and take other quiet and safe abodes, where they could neither be harried by wars nor affected by rebellions. And these men, being taken under protection according to their own wish (as was believed) remained quiet for a short time; later, through their inborn savagery they were aroused to an outrage which brought them destruction, as will be shown in the proper place.
[24] Through this successful sequel of events adequate protection was provided for Illyricum in a twofold manner; and the emperor having in hand the greatness of this task fulfilled it in both ways. The unfaithful were laid low and trodden under foot, but exiled peoples (although equally unstable) who yet seemed likely to act with somewhat more respect, were at length recalled and settled in their ancestral homes. And as a crowning favour, he set over them, not some low-born king, but one whom they themselves had previously chosen as their ruler, a man eminent for his mental and physical gifts.
[25] After such a series of successes Constantius, now raised above any fear, by the unanimous voice of the soldiers was hailed a second time as Sarmaticus, after the name of the conquered people; and now, on the point of departure, he called together all the cohorts, centuries, and maniples, and standing on a tribunal, surrounded by standards, eagles and a throng of many officers of high rank, he addressed the army with these words, being greeted (as usual) with the acclaim of all:
[26] The recollection of our glorious deeds, more grateful to brave men than any pleasure, moves me to rehearse to you, with due modesty, what abuses we most faithful defenders of the Roman state have corrected by the fortune of victory vouchsafed us by Providence both before our battles and in the very heat of combat. For what is so noble, or so justly worthy to be commended to the memory of posterity, as that the soldier should rejoice in his valiant deeds, and the leader in the sagacity of his plans.
[27] Our enemies in their madness were overrunning all Illyricum, with arrogant folly despising us in our absence, while we were defending Italy and Gaul, and in successive raids were laying waste our farthest frontiers, crossing the rivers now in dug-out canoes 14 and sometimes on foot; they did not trust to engagements nor to arms and strength, but, as is their custom, to lurking brigandage, with the craft and various methods of deceit dreaded also by our forefathers from our very first knowledge of the race. These outrages we, being far away, endured as well as they could be borne, hoping that any more serious losses could be obviated by the efficiency of our generals.
[28] But when, encouraged by impunity, they mounted higher and burst forth in destructive and repeated attacks upon our provinces, after securing the approaches to Raetia and by vigilant guard ensuring the safety of Gaul, leaving no cause of fear behind us, we came into Pannonia, intending, if it should please eternal God, to strengthen whatever was tottering. And sallying forth when all was ready (as you know) and spring was well advanced, we took in hand a mighty burden of tasks: first, to build a close-jointed bridge, without being overwhelmed by a shower of missiles, a work which was easily completed; and when we had seen and set foot upon the enemy's territories, without any loss of our men we laid low the Sarmatians who, with spirits regardless of death attempted to resist us. And when with like impudence the Quadi bore aid to the Sarmatians and rushed upon the ranks of our noble legions, we trod them under foot. The latter, after grievous losses, having learned amid their raids and menacing efforts at resistance what our valour could effect, cast aside the protection of arms and offered hands that had been equipped for battle to be bound behind their backs; and seeing that their only safety lay in entreaties, they prostrated themselves at the feet of a merciful Augustus, whose battles they had often learned to have come to a happy issue.
[29] These barely disposed of, we vanquished the Limigantes as well with equal valour, and after many of them had been slain, avoidance of danger forced the rest to seek the protection of their lairs in the marshes.
[30] When these enterprises were brought to a successful issue, the time for seasonable mildness was at hand. The Limigantes we forced to move to remote places, so that they could make no further attempts to destroy our subjects, and very many of them we spared. And over the free Sarmatians we set Zizais, knowing that he would be devoted and loyal to us, and thinking it better to appoint a king for the savages than to take one from them; and it added to the happiness of the occasion, that a ruler was assigned them whom they had previously chosen and accepted.
[31] Hence a fourfold prize, the fruit of a single campaign, was won by us and by our country: first, by taking vengeance on wicked robbers; then, in that you will have abundant booty taken from the enemy; for valour ought to be content with what it has won by toil and a strong arm.
[32] We ourselves have ample wealth and great store of riches, if our labours and courage have preserved safe and sound the patrimonies of all; for this it is that beseems the mind of a good prince, this accords with prosperous successes.
[33] Lastly, I also display the spoil of an enemy's name, surnamed as I am Sarmaticus for the second time, a title not undeserved (without arrogance be it said), which you have with one accord bestowed upon me.”
After this speech was thus ended, the entire assembly with more enthusiasm than common, since the hope of betterment and gains had been increased, broke out into festal cries in praise of the emperor, and in customary fashion calling God to witness that Constantius was invincible, went back to their tents rejoicing. And when the emperor had been escorted to his palace and refreshed by two days' rest, he returned in triumphal pomp to Sirmium, and the companies of soldiers went back to the quarters assigned them.

Након ових догађаја Лимигантима се губи траг у изворима.

 

[Kole11]

IZVORI!!! Samo izvori!

Tako je, samo izvori.

Opste poznata cinjenica je da je Konstantin Veliki naselio 300.000 Sarmata u carstvo. Naravno, ova brojka je verovatno preterana ali sasvim sigurno se radilo o ogromnom broju. Sarmati su uglavnom naseljeni na Balkanu, to su oni Sarmati koje je pominja Jordanes i jos neki pisci koje si ti citarao. Medjutim neki su zavrsili i u drugim krajevima, u Galiciji i Italiji.

Srecom, sacuvan je jedan izvor koji otkriva lokacije Sarmata u Italiji. Izvor se zove Notitia Dignitatum, http://www.fh-augsburg.de/~harsch/Chronologia/Lspost05/Notitia/not_doc3.html, dakle noticija iz 4.veka koja je opisala administrativno uredjenje carstva. U delu koje se tice Italije zanimljiv je sledeci navod:

Item in provincia Italia:
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium
Apuliae et Calabriae.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium
per Brittios et Lucaniam.
Item in provincia Italia mediterranea:
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium
Apulia et Calabriae.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium
Brutios et Lucaniam.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium,
Foro Fulviensi.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium, Opittergii.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium, Patavio.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium, .....
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium, Cremonae.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium, Taurinis.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium,
Aquis sive Tertona.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium, Novariae.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium, Vercellis.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium,
Regionis Samnitis.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium,
Bononiae in Aemilia.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium,
Quadratis et Eporizio.
Praefectus Sarmatarum gentilium,
(in Liguria) Pollentia

Perfekture Sarmata su rasporedjene iskljucivo u gradovima severne i juzne Italije. U juznoj Italiji, prefekture Sarmata su se nalazile u Apuliji, Kalabriji i Lukaoniji.

NIsta ne tvrdim ali konstantujem da su Sarmati naseljeni tacno u one oblasti severne Italije koje ce kasnije biti naseljene Slovenima prema opisu Pavla Djakona. Takodje, u juznoj Italiji su upravo oblasti Apulije, Kalabrije i Lukaonije poznate po misticnoj pojavi slovenskih zupanija, koji su se tamo pojavili a da prethodno nijedan pisani dokaz nije upucivao na njihovo prisustvo u tim oblastima

 

[Scott Isle]

Amijan Markelin, Rerum Gestarum, godina oko 350. Vrijeme Rima.

Sarmati KOD NAS
IMAJU KRALJEVINU i to je
NJIHOVA PAMTIVJEKOVNA DOMOVINA

 

[Khal Drogo]

Постоји и та веза између Сармата и Срба, коју је афирмисао Нико Жупанич у једној расправи (овдје, стр 104)

Ti kavkaski Srbi napustiše jednom u Sarmatskoj seobi na zapad svoj zavičaj, u seobi, koja se desila zbog pritiska Huna iz centralne Azije. Prešavši Don, Srbi osvanuše medju Slovenima u Evropskoj Sarmatiji. Ovde podčiniše ti kavkasko - alarodiski Srbi jedan deo slovenskog ljudstva, dadoše tom delu svoje ime i neku primitivnu organizaciju, a sami jezično izčeznuše. Docnije, verovatno u VI. stoleću, pomakao se srpski deo Slovena u sliv Labe, gde ih nalazimo u prvoj polovini VII. stoleća u punoj istorijskoj svetlosti. Po ovom našem izlaganju znači dakle Srbi „ljudi, narod". Na drugom mestu ćemo pokušati da izložimo istovetnost značenja imena Serbi (Surbi) i Suebi.

и која потврду има у рукопису Плинија старијег (I вијек нове ере) у својој шестој књизи поглавње VII (књига на енглеском и та страница овдје);

пише да на источној обали језера Меотис (Азовско море) иза Кимеријског Босфора (Кимеријски Босфор се описује у претхдном VI поглављу, данас је познат као Керчки мореуз) настањују народи Меотици, Вати (на другом мјесту Вали), Серби, Арчи (изворно је Serrei), Зинги и Псиси. Након њих долази ријека Танаис (данас Дон) на чијим странама битишу Сармати.
Из наведеног се не да закључити да су Серби које помиње Плиније део сарматске конфедерације племена, напротив, у наставку набраја сарматска племена што може упућивати да побројани народи међу којима и Серби не припадају Сарматима.
Да ли су се ови Серби прикључили Сарматима у миграцији на запад, и да ли постоји веза са каснијим Србима у сливу ријеке Лабе,како пише Жупанич. пожељан је опрезнији приступ прије закључака.

 

[Pumpaj Dinstanović]

Amijan Markelin, Rerum Gestarum, godina oko 350. Vrijeme Rima.

Sarmati KOD NAS
IMAJU KRALJEVINU i to je
NJIHOVA PAMTIVJEKOVNA DOMOVINA

Pogledajte prilog 906812

Hajde pročitaj tekst tj. šta sve piše u njemu, umesto da se ne udaljvaš od naslova; pogledaj o bežanju Sarmata k Viktohalima...

P. S. I oslobodi se to deretićevskog mentaliteta da se narodi dele na autohtone i neautohtone. Ne očekujem da hoćeš, ali svejedno se mora reći.