Istvánovits Eszter: International Connections... (Jósa András Múzeum Kiadványai 47. Aszód-Nyíregyháza, 2001)

Andrea Vaday: Military system of the Sarmatians

natio occurred in Tacitus's nuanced general phraseology in respect to barbarian peoples, they were not used for the Sarmatians. Nor can the meanings "citizens" and "town", Roman expressions with specific legal content be relevant to the Sarmatians. The only solution left for the word civitas is the meaning of "village". In the Early Empire, this signified a territory in Pannónia inhabited by a native tribe (see civitas Eraviscorum, civitas Boiorum etc.). The territory and native population of the civitati occupied a subordinate role within the structure of the Empire while still retaining a certain independence of domestic government. Tacitus's phraseology reveals, accordingly, that the Sarmatians had a subordinate role in the eyes of the Romans as compared to the Suebi, who, unlike the Sarmatians, were loyal to Rome. It is also revealed that the Sarmatian "civitas" was fundamentally different from the Quadian territory, which was raised under Vannius to the rank of"regnum" headed by a king (rex) appointed by the Romans. It is unclear whether Tacitus used the distinctive words "regnum" and "civitas" to indicate the relation of the two nations to Rome or only the existence of a divergence between the social-power system of the two peoples. The archaeological finds also reveal that the Jazyges Metanastae, who were less populous than the Quadi, occupied a territory smaller than that of the Quadian kingdom (it was even smaller than the civitas Eraviscorum). Thus in connection with the Sarmatians in the Carpathian Basin we can only speak about a civitas barbarorum at that time that was loosely dependent, preserving its tribal entity independent of the Quadians due partly to the secondary role it occupied within the barbarian alliance system, partly to the size of its territory and partly to the lack of a king. Their principes, barbarian aristocrats, were still taking their first steps in the vassal relationship set up with neighbouring Pannónia. Both the historical events and Tacitus's phraseology imply that the main body of the Jazyges, led by the king, had not yet arrived in the Hungarian Plain. This assumption is also supported by the fact that the Roxolani appeared on the Lower Danube at the same time. It is significant that when the Roxolani appeared, the proconsul of Moesia negotiated with the Dacian, the Sarmatian (Jazygian) and the Roxolanian kings when he tried to establish an alliance system on the barbarian left bank. This list means that for a certain time the Sarmatian Jazyges on the Lower Danube and the Roxolani collaborated in some form in the Lower Danube region (the sources differentiated the Sarmatians and the Roxolanians, mentioning kings for both tribes) and that the king of the Jazygian Sarmatian main body ruled over the Jazyges living on the Lower Danube. This explains why only the Jazygian aristocracy negotiated in Pannónia. It must have been after this that further Jazygian population fragments arrived in the Hungarian Plain, increasing their power. It was probably as a consequence of this that by the beginning of the 70s, they had forced the neighbouring Cotini and Osi tribes to pay taxes

7 and also slowly started to spread southwards from the northern part of the Danube-Tisza Interfluve. Their territory is distinguished in this early period by female burials with gold finds. There are only a few male burials from the early period. The earliest male burials with characteristic eastern finds were discovered at the Újszilvás (TARI 1994), Dunaharaszti (VADAY 1989B) and SzolnokTac. Germania, 43. 1: "partem tributorum Sarmatae, partem Quadi ut alienigenis imponunt; Cotini, quo magis pudeat, et fernem effodiunt."