GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 1996-06 > 0836102478


From: Chris Bennett <>
Subject: Re: DFA: possible pre-Arsacid link
Date: Sat, 29 Jun 1996 18:41:18 -0800


Stewart --

I just sat down and compared your proposed Seleucid link to Settipani's. It
looks as follows:

Settipani:

1) Antiochus I of Commagene [known Seleucid descendant]
2) daughter md Artavazd of Media Atropatene
3) Unknown Atropatenian prince = unknown Arsacid princess
4) Vonones II etc

Baldwin:

1) Cleopatra of Pontus, probable Seleucid descendant, md Tigranes of Armenia
2) daughter (mother unknown) md Mithridates of Media Atropatene
3) Artavazd of Media Atropatene (probably of Armenian descent) md unknown
4) Unknown Atropatenian prince = unknown Arsacid princess
5) Vonones II etc

So we are weighing a speculative marriage + speculative maternity + known
Seleucid descent (Settipani) vs a known marriage + probable maternity +
speculative maternity (Tigranes had several wives) + probable but uncertain
Seleucid descent (Baldwin). At the dynastic level, Settipani's proposal
that Strabo's Syrian marriage was to Commagene seems to me a fair guess
(its likely to be recent to Strabo, hence post-Seleucid, and the
alternatives -- Emesa, Osrhoene, Judea -- all look pretty bad); whether it
took this particular form is, I agree, much more arguable. So on balance I
think your proposal is a bit more likely than Settipani's, but I don't
really see that much difference between them. They may well both be true
(or false).

-------------------

The possibility of an Armenian-based DFA was first identified by Wagner over 20
years ago. It certainly seems to be the approach that offers the best chance
of providing a reasonably detailed, if partially conjectural DFA. (I do have a
concern that the detail ultimately seems to rest entirely on Toumanoff's
work --
has anyone seen an informed critique of his medieval Armenian descents? There
aren't too many Armenianists around, so there isn't the same level of critical
mass that you get with western European medieval historians, for example). But
it is perhaps worth standing back a bit and reviewing what the alternative
routes are. THe ones I can see are:

1) Roman aristocracy. We know a great deal about certain areas at certain
times, e.g. Gaul in late antiquity, and there are studies like PLRE which are
Empire-wide, but I am not aware of any in-deth regional prospographical or
genealogical studies that cover the entire Roman period (say, 0-500). Gaul
seems to be the best studied, is anyone aware of studies for, say, Spain,
Greece or (above all) Italy?

2) Native aristocracy within the empire. The only outline argument I have seen
here is one which runs: Cleopatra -> Zenobia (by Syrian routes unknown) who
had senatorial descendants in 4th century Rome, possibly traceable. Very
sketchy, but has the great attraction of passing through these two famous
queens; there is also a speculative case that Cleopatra was descended from the
High Priests of Memphis, which is the only conceivable route I can see to a
pharaonic descent (I think we all agree that the Nitetis proposal is dead --
Settipani himself no longer considers it viable)

3) Client kingdom aristocracy: Apart from Armenia, the only client state I
know of which lasted through most of the Imperial period was the Bosporan
kingdom. The only detailed study I know is Minn's 1913 book "Scythians and
Greeks"; I imagine any more recent work is probably in Russian. My conclusion
was that the Bosporan dynasty probably lasted the whole period till the kingdom
was destroyed by Ermanaric the Goth, however, the genealogy is only traceable
in the first century or so. More seriously, there seems no prospect of a
descent, barring some miraculous discovery such as a Bosporan princess married
to an Amal Ostrogoth with (equal miracle) traceable descents.

4) Kingdoms outside the empire entirely. Apart from Iran (which ties back to
Armenia) most attention has been focussed on the Jews of the Babylonian exile.
This is definitely an interesting possibility, especially since there is a good
case for the exilarchs having had a Davidic descent, even though there are some
centuries missing in what we know. However, the Zuckermann thesis, tying the
exilarchs back to southern France in the 8th century AD, seems very suspect to
me (I understand that David Kelley is researching this in depth). Otherwise,
we are looking at Meroe, south Arabia, or areas farther afield such as India,
Sri Lanka and CHina. Only CHina seems likely to provide descents traceable to
modern times.

It also seems worth reviewing how far back we can possibly hope to go. The
Achaemenids seem to be the realistic stopping point for most current DFA
discussions. Nevertheless, if an entry point to Egypt can ever be found then
there are arguments, of very variable quality, to take you back at least to the
19th dynasty and possibly the late 17th; I have elsewhere sketched out a case
for going from there back to the mid 13th dynasty. I don't regard the 12th or
even the 11th as being entirely out of the question, though I am not in a
position to suggest a route. Crossing the FIP is a very tall order, but if you
could ever reach the 6th dynasty then there is fairly clear sailing back to the
2nd (in outline, certainly not in detail), which probably means a path existed
back to the 1st. However, that initial entry barrier into Egypt is pretty high.

I have also looked at the possibility of a Mesopotamian descent, and I think I
have made an interesting conjectural case (discussed elsewhere) for tracing a
descent from Eriba Marduk, king of Babylon in the 8th century BC, to Darius the
Great -- though I certainly don't regard it as fact. The jackpot here would be
an Assyrian royal descent, which, once found, could be taken back (with some
argument and one large gap) to Adasi, c1700 BC. There is the barest hint that
such a descent might exist, but it relies heavily on later Jewish legend of
very uncertain historical provenance.

Stretching this exercise in wishful thinking to the limit, a new route to these
very ancient times that is beginning to come into view is via the Hittites. It
is becoming increasingly clear that branches of the imperial dynasty survived
the fall of the empire, almost certainly at Malatya, probably at Carchemish,
and possibly other places, currently unknown. These Syro-Hittite kingdoms
lasted till the 8th century BC. We can't even guess yet how, but if a descent
could be found through the Assyrians then an Imperial Hittite descent might be
possible.

Cheers,
Chris

This thread: