GEN-MEDIEVAL-L Archives

Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2000-09 > 0967947514


From: Settipani <>
Subject: Re: Juba "The most accomplished of kings" (DFA)
Date: Sat, 02 Sep 2000 19:18:34 -0700


The question of the descendants of Cleopatra was already discussed. I have devoted a special chapter of my book "continuite gentilice et continuite familiale dans les familles senatoriales romaines", Oxford, 2000, to this issue (p. 433-453). The claim of Zenobia seems have good chances to
be an authentic one. To be sure, the posterity of this queen is not known after the second generation. But the dynasty of Emesa, which share Zenobia ancestry, left numerous descendants in the roman or gallo-roman nobility (see my stemmata, p. 443, 448 and 453).
Marc Antony have others wifes or concubines. Of course, he is an ancestor of Nero by his daughter Antonia. But Antonia was also the ancestress of Iunius Blaesus, killed by Vitellius in 69, and probably, of others senatorial descendants in the second century (p. 307-308).
By an oriental concubine (perhaps a median princess), he left other descendants. His granddaughter the queen Pythodoris is the ancestress of a long line or roman senator by one of his sons, attested until the mid third century (p. 362-366), and, perhaps, until the end of the Roman Empire
and after in medieval Byzantium (p. 368, 375, 381-3, 408-432). By her daughter, Pythodoris is the ancestress of the Bosporean dynasty, known until the mid fourth century. P. W. Fisher have recently supposed that a princess of this dynasty was married with the gothic king Ermenaric, but
without any serious argumentation.
Many lines are possible for the descendants of hellenistic kings. Some were given in my book LGA, via the armenian kings. In the same way, we have to explore many others possibility, by the Sassanian, then the arabic chieftains, or by the georgian people. Other ways include the roman
senate. In my last book, I have examined some of them (p. 366, 380, 454-467, 493), but without pretention of exhaustivity.
For Asoka : Appian, Syr. 55, said that Seleucus make a matrimonial alliance with Chandragupta. A. Bouche-Leclercq rejected this text because no wife or daughter of Seleucus I is known to explain this alliance. The argument is very weak. Today, we know that Asoka, grandson of Chandragupta
was hellenophile. He speak of his "cousins" of the land of Yona (= Greece). Nowever, one medieval text assume that Asoka 's paternal grandmother was the first cousin of her husband Chandragupta, but this was contested in 1173 by Buddhapriya who state that this woman was the daughter of
Seleucus. I have not read the most recent bibliography on the subject, but I think that F. Holt, Alexander the Great and Bactria, Leiden, 1993 (specially, p. 101) and W. W. Tarn, The Greeks in Bactria and India, third edition updated by F. Holt, Chicago, 1984 are good enough with very
extensive bibliographical notes. Of course, no credit is given to the forged inscriptions published by S. Paranavitana who give an extensive pedigree of the Mauryas with many royal (persian and greek) alliances. See L. Brook, Journal of Ancient and Med. Studies, 4 (1985/6) p.7-21.

CS
The question of the descendants of Cleopatra was already discussed. I have devoted a special chapter of my book "continuite gentilice et continuite familiale dans les familles senatoriales romaines", Oxford, 2000, to this issue (p. 433-453). The claim of Zenobia seems have good chances to
be an authentic one. To be sure, the posterity of this queen is not known after the second generation. But the dynasty of Emesa, which share Zenobia ancestry, left numerous descendants in the roman or gallo-roman nobility (see my stemmata, p. 443, 448 and 453).
Marc Antony have others wifes or concubines. Of course, he is an ancestor of Nero by his daughter Antonia. But Antonia was also the ancestress of Iunius Blaesus, killed by Vitellius in 69, and probably, of others senatorial descendants in the second century (p. 307-308).
By an oriental concubine (perhaps a median princess), he left other descendants. His granddaughter the queen Pythodoris is the ancestress of a long line or roman senator by one of his sons, attested until the mid third century (p. 362-366), and, perhaps, until the end of the Roman Empire
and after in medieval Byzantium (p. 368, 375, 381-3, 408-432). By her daughter, Pythodoris is the ancestress of the Bosporean dynasty, known until the mid fourth century. P. W. Fisher have recently supposed that a princess of this dynasty was married with the gothic king Ermenaric, but
without any serious argumentation.
Many lines are possible for the descendants of hellenistic kings. Some were given in my book LGA, via the armenian kings. In the same way, we have to explore many others possibility, by the Sassanian, then the arabic chieftains, or by the georgian people. Other ways include the roman
senate. In my last book, I have examined some of them (p. 366, 380, 454-467, 493), but without pretention of exhaustivity.
For Asoka : Appian, Syr. 55, said that Seleucus make a matrimonial alliance with Chandragupta. A. Bouche-Leclercq rejected this text because no wife or daughter of Seleucus I is known to explain this alliance. The argument is very weak. Today, we know that Asoka, grandson of Chandragupta
was hellenophile. He speak of his "cousins" of the land of Yona (= Greece). Nowever, one medieval text assume that Asoka 's paternal grandmother was the first cousin of her husband Chandragupta, but this was contested in 1173 by Buddhapriya who state that this woman was the daughter of
Seleucus. I have not read the most recent bibliography on the subject, but I think that F. Holt, Alexander the Great and Bactria, Leiden, 1993 (specially, p. 101) and W. W. Tarn, The Greeks in Bactria and India, third edition updated by F. Holt, Chicago, 1984 are good enough with very
extensive bibliographical notes. Of course, no credit is given to the forged inscriptions published by S. Paranavitana who give an extensive pedigree of the Mauryas with many royal (persian and greek) alliances. See L. Brook, Journal of Ancient and Med. Studies, 4 (1985/6) p.7-21.

CS

This thread: