[Long]: Settipani on Baldwin on the Commagenian DFA link Part 3 of 3
Chris Bennett
ours. It is certainly very interesting. Indeed we have already researched
a similar route through the Mithridatids, without however adopting this
solution, which is nevertheless one of the first which came to mind. The
reason is simple, and is noted by M Baldwin himself: we do not know if the
daughter of Tigranes II who married Mithridates of Parthia was herself
issue of the Mithridatid wife of Tigranes. Now, as M Baldwin always
reminds us, multiple marriages were the rule. To decide, then, in the
absence of any indicator, that a given child was born to a given mother is
totally arbitrary, and risks giving rise to the following reflections: "It
is rather disturbing that among all of the possible ways … the one is
chosen which gives the desired conclusion. It is not a proper use of
evidence to take the most desirable possibility amongst the numerous
alternatives…" Not having found any argument in favour of this hypothesis,
it is wiser to abstain from it. Even wiser when one considers the
following calculation: Tigranes married the daughter of Mithridates in 89
or 93 (Sullivan, 1990, p346 n. 2). A daughter born of this union would
thus see light of day at best in 92, and rather in 88. If this daughter
was the link between the Armenian kings and the Atropatid dynasy, then
Artavsdes I of Media descends from it and can only be her grandson. But
Artvasdes was already king in 56 and his first children must have been born
around 45/40 or later. It is hardly likely, in consequence, that
Artavasdes was descended from the daughter of Mithridates of Pontus. On
the other hand, the occurrence of the names of Mithridates and Ariobarzanes
among the Atropatids could be an indication that one of their ancestors was
a princess of Pontus. Strabo may not have mentioned this alliance because
it was too distant, or because he did not know of it. On yet another tack,
suppose that Vonones I of Parthia inherited Armenia because he was issue of
a marriage between his father and Cleopatra, and that the latter was a
descendant (granddaughter?) of Tigranes II of Armenia and Cleopatra of
Pontus. It remains to know whether Vonones II also descended (through his
mother) of this marriage between Phraates IV and Cleopatra. Perhaps the
phrase of Tacitus, noted by M Baldwin and which escaped us, provides a
pointer in this direction?
Finally, a more personal and more general note:
It is surely difficult to remain absolutely impartial, no science being
objective, and certainly not History, but I wish to reassure M Baldwin of
my intent to be so as far as possible. I know nothing of my ancestors
beyond those who I have personally known, and it is therefore quite
unimportant to me, in the last analysis, whether a DFA is proven or not.
The only pleasure which I have found in it is that of research, and if I am
not sparing of hypotheses, I try at least to justify them all and to avoid
stacking them up without control. Now, I am certainly mistaken in
different places. I am trying to maintain a list of them in these addenda.
But, really, I do not believe that it is the generations incriminated here
which are the weakest. They remain hypothetical, hence uncertain, but it
seems to me with a good degree of probability. In truth, the two weakest
points in my book lie elsewhere. In the first place, the ascendance
towards Egypt. I ceased to believe in this myself a long time ago, the
solution proposed here being possible, surely, but in fact quite
improbable. It would be better to renounce it. Other ways may be possible
and they should be reviewed. The second arguable point concerns the
ascendance of Leo VI of Byzantium. I will return to this later (point 24
of the addenda). Here let us simply say that I remain persuaded that,
logically, as a result of our data, he considered himself to be certainly
the son of Michael III and therefore made tell of it. And the Mamikonian
ascendance of the latter seems to me to be quite well established. All the
same, logic is not always a good argument in genealogy, above all if one
admits, which is likely, that the three imperial lovers could have come
together in the same bed. Chance would then play quite an important role.
I judge that, even in this case, the conviction of the protagonists was
based on some precise detail, such as a physical or other resemblance. But
as I know nothing for sure, it would be better to consider that the
paternity of Basil is at least equally likely. And on Basil's side things
are less clear. I no longer believe at all today in the Mamikonian or
Bagratid ascendance of Basil based on the presence of the names Hmayek or
Bagrat in his family, as was said by Adontz or the late prince Toumanoff.
This argument alone is too weak. There is on the other hand a real
possibility of a link with Leo V, and whatever Signes Codoner may say, the
latter is certainly linked to the Artsruni. All the same, I admit that the
link between Basil and Leo V is hypothetical and there is a weakness there
that one should not hide. I therefore remind M Baldwin that we could avoid
this reef and recover a DFA which does not present this inconvenience, but
which nevertheless concerns quite a large portion of western nobility, as
noted by Wagner, through the Armenian ancestry of the house of Savoy, let
alone some other paths [see Settipani, 1992, 37-8 and 41-3]
Bibliography:
BALDWIN (1996): S. Baldwin, Comments on "Iberian route" DFA line, web, 8
juin 1996
BRAUND (1994): D. Braund, Georgia in Antiquity. A history of Colchis and
Transcaucasian Iberia 550 BC-AD 562 , Oxford 1994.
MARQUART (1903): J. Marquart, Osteuropäische und ostasiatische Streifzüge.
Ethnologische und historisch-topographische Studien zur Geschichte des 9.
Und 10. Jahrhunderts (c. 840-940) , Leipzig 1903
MARTIN-HISARD (1996 (a)): B. Martin-Hisard & N. Garsoian, Unité et
diversité de la Caucasie médièvale (VIIe-XIee s.), in Il Caucaso, 1996, p.
275-348
REGULA (1995): W. Regula, Genealogie, 22,3/4 (1995) (non vidimus ).
SCHOTTKY (1989): M. Schottky, Media Atropatene und Gross-Armenien in
hellenistischer Zeit , Bonn 1989
SETTIPANI (1992): C. Settipani, La transition entre mythe et réalité ,
Archivum 37 (1992), p.27-67
SIGNES CODONER (1991): J. Signes Codoner, Los origenes del emperador Leon
el Armenio (813-820) , in Mnemosynum. C. Codoner a discipulis oblatum ,
éd. A. R. GUERREIRA, Salamanque 1991, p. 309-320.
SULLIVAN (1990): R. D. Sullivan, Near Eastern Royalty and Rome 100-30 BC
(Toronto, 1990)
THOMSON (1996): R. W. Thomson, Rewriting Caucasian History. The Medieval
Armenian Adaptation of the Georgian Chronicles, Oxford 1996