The "Descent from Antiquity" thread has become difficult to navigate
because of its size, so I have started a new thread.

On 2/22/2024 12:22 PM, miked wrote:

[snip]

> I have a bit more interest in DFA research, but I notice that most of
> the researchers
> into this tend to be 'believers' whereas i tend to be sceptical that we
> can ever confirm a particular line especially if it has to descend to
> western europe. So a DFA
> from Confucius isnt any use unless it ends in the west! But i get your
> point as
> most of the interest is from people in the west.

I think that you underestimate the number of skeptics who follow this
group (including me). One problem is that there are quite a few
participants who have followed this newsgroup for a long time (some of
us since it started in 1995), with detailed rebuttals against these
fantasies having appeared a number of times (sometimes ad nauseam), and
there is a certain amount of fatigue that sets in when seeing someone
bring up a supposed DFA (or some other doubtful line) for the nth time.

> However any DFA that come via the Mamikonians raises problems as that
> family is poorly documented, even though descents from them have
> regularly been posted here for discussion over many years. Usually its
> just lines from a secondary source, such as Settipani's Nos Ancetres de
> l'Antiquite. To be fair to these researchers, like Settipani & Toumanoff
> etc, their tables and trees are usually replete with dotted lines, which
> are then made solid by subsequent
> posters on the net. However theres not usually been much discussion on
> what are the primary sources for all this speculation. As I see it such
> lines depend on a series of gateway ancestors who form links to other
> familes or dynasties. As I am not so upto speed on all the various
> individuals in the chain I shall just deal with certain vital links.

I would not include Settipani and Toumanoff in the same league. After I
examined some of Toumanoff's journal articles and other work in detail,
my opinion of his work went way down, especially with respect to his
efforts at genealogy, which I have often found laughable (for example,
his ten successive generations of princes of Siunia in one century,
without any "dotted" lines). As a historian, Toumanof makes a good case
for the general continuity of the Armenian and Georgian aristocracy from
ancient to modern times, but when it comes to his attempts to document
specific relationships, I have seen too much cherry-picking from
sources, and fudging of information to fit his theories to have any
trust in his genealogical conclusions. Also, his citations of sources
are often so poor (or just absent) that trying to trace the information
back to see if some kernel is true can be a thankless chore.

On the other hand, even though Settipani's arguments sometimes irritate
me, I still have a great deal of admiration for his work. Most
importantly, his citations of sources are usually clear enough that I
have generally had no problem following up the sources to see the
reasons for his arguments, with which I agree more often than not. What
bothers me the most about his work is his habit of conjecturing several
generations of ancestry for individuals of unproven parentage (both in
his DFA work and his Western European genealogical work). A few
generations worth of dotted-line "ancestry" can cause problems with the
dissemination of genealogical information, even when the uncertainty is
freely acknowledged (which it usually is in Settipani's case). Many of
those who copy his trees (often with dotted-lines removed) seem to have
no use for any form of uncertainty.

> 1 AIUI a primary source [?Moses of Khoren] says that Hamazasp Mamikonian
> married the daughter of the Patriarch Isaac (d439). She was a descendant
> of Gregory the Illuminator (d328?) son of Anak the Suren, who was the
> cousin of the first christian king of Armenia, Tiridates III [dc330] a
> descendant of Vologeses V of Parthia [d208]. The relationships of
> various Arsacids are also rather poorly documented but at least we are
> in late antiquity. So here is the Arsacid - Mamikonian link.

I posted a message with subject line "DFA: Arsacid-Gregorid-Mamikonid
link" to this newsgroup on 13 March 1997, discussing these two links, in
which I offered the opinion that the Mamikonid-Gregorid link is genuine
and well-documented by the late fifth century Armenian historian Lazar
Parapeci, a contemporary. On the other hand, the supposed marriage of a
Gregorid ancestor with a descendant of Tiridates III, while being
plausible and quite possibly even true, does not qualify as
well-documented, being based on the work of Faustos of Byzantium, an
often garbled work probably written not long before Lazar's history. To
my knowledge, proposers of DFA's do not try to take any such line
through Anak, an obscure Armenian noble known only because he was
Gregory's father. The supposed descent of Tiridates III from Vologeses
V of Parthia looks like a house of cards to me. While I accept that the
these Arsacid kings of Armenia probably had a fairly close descent from
some Parthain Arsacid king, I would not be comfortable accepting any
specific descent as likely based on the information of which I am aware.

> 2 Jumping forward 3 centuries, Sembat VII Bagratuni [d775] who was the
> ancestor of the later
> Bagratids of Armenia and maybe Iberia as well, is often said on the net
> to be the son in law of Samuel Mamikonian. I dont know what the source
> is for this. The question then even so is whether this Samuel is
> descended from Hamazasp. This was Toumanoffs belief [Cyrille Toumanoff,
> Manuel de Généalogie et de Chronologie pour l'histoire de la Caucasie
> Chrétienne (Arménie - Géorgie - Albanie) table 15 and table 71, are the
> refs I've seen on the net], but if he was descended from another branch
> of the family, this rather kills any DFA at this point. Anyway this is
> the Mamikonian - Bagratid link.

The link between Smbat and Samuel is pretty well-documented through the
work of another near contemporary, Lewond, listing some of those killed
in battle in 775, including "... High Constabie Smbat from the house of
Bagratunik'; Sahak, his ally and co-warrior; General Mushel from the
house of Mamikoneank' and Samuel the Ter (Lord) of the Mamikoneank', a
lively and a handsome young man, who was the father-in-law of the High
Constable ..." [Zaven Arzoumanian, ed. & trans., History of Lewond The
Eminent Vardapet of the Armenians (St. Sahag and St. Mesrob Armenian
Church, Wynnewood, Pennsylvania, 1982), p. 137]. The term "Ter"
generally referred to the head of a clan, making it much more likely
that Samuel descended from the Gregorid marriage than from a cadet branch.

As for the other lines you mentioned, none of them ever seemed worth my
time to investigate more thoroughly.

Stewart Baldwin

On 24-Feb-24 5:16 AM, Stewart Baldwin wrote:

<snip>

> The link between Smbat and Samuel is pretty well-documented through the
> work of another near contemporary, Lewond, listing some of those killed
> in battle in 775, including "... High Constabie Smbat from the house of
> Bagratunik'; Sahak, his ally and co-warrior; General Mushel from the
> house of Mamikoneank' and Samuel the Ter (Lord) of the Mamikoneank', a
> lively and a handsome young man, who was the father-in-law of the High
> Constable ..." [Zaven Arzoumanian, ed. & trans., History of Lewond The
> Eminent Vardapet of the Armenians (St. Sahag and St. Mesrob Armenian
> Church, Wynnewood, Pennsylvania, 1982), p. 137].  The term "Ter"
> generally referred to the head of a clan, making it much more likely
> that Samuel descended from the Gregorid marriage than from a cadet branch.

I'm not sure that "near-contemporary" is a very secure description -
have you seen this
https://poj.peeters-leuven.be/content.php?url=article&id=2162441&journal_code=MUS?

Peter Stewart

--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG antivirus software.
www.avg.com

Stewart Baldwin wrote:

> The "Descent from Antiquity" thread has become difficult to navigate
> because of its size, so I have started a new thread.

> On 2/22/2024 12:22 PM, miked wrote:
> > 1 AIUI a primary source [?Moses of Khoren] says that Hamazasp Mamikonian
> > married the daughter of the Patriarch Isaac (d439). She was a descendant
> > of Gregory the Illuminator (d328?) son of Anak the Suren, who was the
> > cousin of the first christian king of Armenia, Tiridates III [dc330] a
> > descendant of Vologeses V of Parthia [d208]. The relationships of
> > various Arsacids are also rather poorly documented but at least we are
> > in late antiquity. So here is the Arsacid - Mamikonian link.

> I posted a message with subject line "DFA: Arsacid-Gregorid-Mamikonid
> link" to this newsgroup on 13 March 1997, discussing these two links, in
> which I offered the opinion that the Mamikonid-Gregorid link is genuine
> and well-documented by the late fifth century Armenian historian Lazar
> Parapeci, a contemporary. On the other hand, the supposed marriage of a
> Gregorid ancestor with a descendant of Tiridates III, while being
> plausible and quite possibly even true, does not qualify as
> well-documented, being based on the work of Faustos of Byzantium, an
> often garbled work probably written not long before Lazar's history. To
> my knowledge, proposers of DFA's do not try to take any such line
> through Anak, an obscure Armenian noble known only because he was
> Gregory's father.

I assumed that the significance of Anak in these theories is that he is
said in the story to be a refugee from Persia and of the Royal Arsacid
dynasty. I dont know what the source for this is, whether its later
medieval or in the legend of St.Gregory and as it seems non specific it
isnt very useful. I read that other versions of the story claim Anak was the
kings brother. But I see from your earlier account, that the sources
actually trace the Arsacid link via a sister of King Tiran [or
Tigranes VII on the net] and the father of St.Nerses [dc373], which
seems to have its own chronological difficulties.

However I would just leave it as there is a claimed link between the
Mamikonians and Arsacids in old histories, as I'm certainly not qualified to
separate legend from history in these sources, or to sort out the historical
jumble of 3rd-4th century Armenia.

>The supposed descent of Tiridates III from Vologeses
> V of Parthia looks like a house of cards to me. While I accept that the
> these Arsacid kings of Armenia probably had a fairly close descent from
> some Parthain Arsacid king, I would not be comfortable accepting any
> specific descent as likely based on the information of which I am aware.

Yes I agree with this too, but on the net you frequently come across the
'fact' that Vologeses VI d228, Artabanus IV d224, Rev Martali of Iberia d216,
and Chosroes I of Armenia d217 are all brothers, sons of Vologeses V [d208]
who is equated to an earlier Valash/Vologeses II of Armenia [if he existed,
also there seems to be some variants in the numbering of the Vologeses].

I dont know if the stories about Rev Martali which give him an Arsacid descent
are much later, but they sound more legend than history, he is anyway just called
son of an unnamed king of Armenia. Vologeses IV [c147-91] reigned perhaps longer
than any other Parthian king if he is 1 person, so could have had dozens of sons, so
there may be many branches of the later Parthians. For example the Bakur [or Pacorus?]
who is installed by the Parthians in Armenia in c163 could be 1 of these,
and there is apparently an inscription [in Ephesos?] naming 2 brothers Aurelius
Pacorus King of Armenia and his brother Aurelius Meherdates.

> > 2 Jumping forward 3 centuries, Sembat VII Bagratuni [d775] who was the
> > ancestor of the later
> > Bagratids of Armenia and maybe Iberia as well, is often said on the net
> > to be the son in law of Samuel Mamikonian. I dont know what the source
> > is for this. The question then even so is whether this Samuel is
> > descended from Hamazasp. This was Toumanoffs belief [Cyrille Toumanoff,
> > Manuel de Généalogie et de Chronologie pour l'histoire de la Caucasie
> > Chrétienne (Arménie - Géorgie - Albanie) table 15 and table 71, are the
> > refs I've seen on the net], but if he was descended from another branch
> > of the family, this rather kills any DFA at this point. Anyway this is
> > the Mamikonian - Bagratid link.

> The link between Smbat and Samuel is pretty well-documented through the
> work of another near contemporary, Lewond, listing some of those killed
> in battle in 775, including "... High Constabie Smbat from the house of
> Bagratunik'; Sahak, his ally and co-warrior; General Mushel from the
> house of Mamikoneank' and Samuel the Ter (Lord) of the Mamikoneank', a
> lively and a handsome young man, who was the father-in-law of the High
> Constable ..." [Zaven Arzoumanian, ed. & trans., History of Lewond The
> Eminent Vardapet of the Armenians (St. Sahag and St. Mesrob Armenian
> Church, Wynnewood, Pennsylvania, 1982), p. 137]. The term "Ter"
> generally referred to the head of a clan, making it much more likely
> that Samuel descended from the Gregorid marriage than from a cadet branch.

Thanks very much for the info confirming this link.

Mike