Armenia and the ‘Orontid Connection’. Some Remarks on Strabo, Geography 11,14,15, in Michael Blömer et al., Common Dwelling Place of all the Gods. Commagene in its Local, Regional and Global Hellenistic Context, Franz Steiner, Stuttgart 2021, 345-356

Common Dwelling Place of all the Gods Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Commagene in its Local, Regional and Global Hellenistic Context Edited by Michael Blömer, Stefan Riedel, Miguel John Versluys and Engelbert Winter ORIENS E T OCCIDENS Studien zu antiken Kulturkontakten und ihrem Nachleben | 34 Geschichte Franz Steiner Verlag Franz Steiner Verlag 88 contubernium Tübinger Beiträge zur Universitäts- und Wissenschaftsgeschichte Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Franz Steiner Verlag Oriens et Occidens Studien zu antiken Kulturkontakten und ihrem Nachleben Herausgegeben von Josef Wiesehöfer Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr in Zusammenarbeit mit Pierre Briant, Geoffrey Greatrex, Amélie Kuhrt und Robert Rollinger Band 34 Franz Steiner Verlag Common Dwelling Place of all the Gods Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Commagene in its Local, Regional and Global Hellenistic Context Edited by Michael Blömer, Stefan Riedel, Miguel John Versluys and Engelbert Winter Franz Steiner Verlag Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation) under Germany’s Excellence Strategy – EXC 2060 “Religion and Politics. Dynamics of Tradition and Innovation” – 390726036 as well as the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) under VICI project 277-61-001 Dieses Buch ist eine Open-Access-Publikation. Dieses Werk ist lizenziert unter einer Creative Commons Namensnennung – Nicht kommerziell – Keine Bearbeitungen 4.0 International Lizenz. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.de Umschlagabbildung: Nemrud Dağ, view of the statues on the east terrace taken during the campaign of 1953 (Photo: Friedrich Karl Dörner, © Forschungsstelle Asia Minor, Dörner archive) Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek: Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über <http://dnb.d-nb.de> abrufbar. Dieses Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist unzulässig und strafbar. © Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart 2021 Layout und Herstellung durch den Verlag Druck: Memminger MedienCentrum, Memmingen Gedruckt auf säurefreiem, alterungsbeständigem Papier. Printed in Germany. ISBN 978-3-515-12925-1 (Print) ISBN 978-3-515-12926-8 (E-Book) https://doi.org/10.25162/9783515129268 Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Table of Contents Foreword & Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Miguel John Versluys & Stefan Riedel Beyond East & West Hellenistic Commagene between Particularism and Universalism 11 Part I: Theoretical and Conceptual Introductions Rachel Mairs ‘Ai Khanoum God with Feet of Marble’ Reading Ai Khanoum through Commagene 33 Stefan R Hauser ‘Hellenized Iranians?’ Antiochos I and the Power of Image 45 Matthew P Canepa Commagene Before and Beyond Antiochos I Dynastic Identity, Topographies of Power and Persian Spectacular Religion 71 Helen Fragaki Reversing Points of Reference Commagene and the Anfushy Necropolis from Alexandria in Modern Scholarship Franz Steiner Verlag 103 6 Table of Contents Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Part II (Within): Archaeology and History of Hellenistic Commagene – The Local Context Margherita Facella Sovereignty and Autonomy in the Hellenistic Coins of Commagene 139 Werner Oenbrink The Late-Hellenistic Architecture of Commagene 163 Lennart Kruijer & Stefan Riedel Transforming Objectscapes in Samosata The Impact of the Palatial Complex 185 Bruno Jacobs The Syncretistic Episode in Late-Hellenistic Commagene The Greek-Persian Religious Concept of Antiochos I and the Ethnicity of the Local Population 231 Albert de Jong Dynastic Zoroastrianism in Commagene The Religion of King Antiochos 253 Rolf Strootman Orontid Kingship in its Hellenistic Context The Seleucid Connections of Antiochos I of Commagene 295 Anna Collar Time, Echoes and Experience Perceiving the Landscape in Commagene 319 Part III (Between): Comparative Studies on Hellenistic Commagene – The Regional and Global Context Looking East Giusto Traina Armenia and the ‘Orontid Connection’ Some Remarks on Strabo, Geography 11,14,15 Franz Steiner Verlag 345 Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Table of Contents 7 Lara Fabian Beyond and Yet In-between The Caucasus and the Hellenistic Oikoumene 357 Vito Messina Beyond Greece and Babylonia Global and Local at Seleucia on the Tigris 381 Looking South Orit Peleg-Barkat Herodian Art and Architecture as Reflections of King Herod’s Many Faces 409 Stephan G Schmid Was There a Nabataean Identity – And If Yes, How Many? 439 Looking West Christoph Michels ‘Achaemenid’ and ‘Hellenistic’ Strands of Representation in the Minor Kingdoms of Asia Minor 475 Monika Trümper Delos Beyond East and West Cultural Choices in Domestic Architecture 497 Annette Haug Decoscapes in Hellenistic Italy Figurative Polychrome Mosaics between Local and Global 541 Concluding Remarks Achim Lichtenberger Hellenistic Commagene in Context Is ‘Global’ the Answer and Do We Have to Overcome Cultural ‘Containers’? 579 Index 589 Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Armenia and the ‘Orontid Connection’ Some Remarks on Strabo, Geography 11,14,15 Giusto Traina The rulers of Hellenistic Armenia and Sophene are of utmost importance for the study of Hellenistic Commagene and Commagenian kingship This is due to the immediate geographical proximity of the kingdoms as well as to the shared genealogic roots in the dynasty of the Orontids 1 Armenia and Sophene thus make up an important part of the regional background against which the Commagenian developments must be considered In terms of dynastic ideology, the Orontids are often presented as the genealogic link of the Commagenian kings to the Achaemenids; an interpretation that is based on the ancestral gallery of Antiochos I on Nemrud Dağ 2 Some scholars consider this to be an invented tradition alone, as part of a strategy of legitimation of Antiochos I Such a view, however, ignores the importance and possibilities the ‘Orontid connection’ possessed to legitimize Commagenian kingship on the regional level (and beyond) This debate is inevitably linked to the specific question of the royal status of the Armenian Orontids, which will be at the core of the following considerations The only piece of evidence for the founding of the independent kingdom of Greater Armenia is a passage of Strabo’s Geography (from Polybios?): Ὁ μὲν δὴ παλαιὸς λόγος οὗτος ὁ δὲ τούτου νεώτερος καὶ κατὰ Πέρσας εἰς τὸ ἐφεξῆς μέχρι εἰς ἡμᾶς ὡς ἐν κεφαλαίῳ πρέποι ἂν μέχρι τοσούτου λεχθείς, ὅτι κατεῖχον τὴν Ἀρμενίαν Πέρσαι καὶ Μακεδόνες, μετὰ ταῦτα οἱ τὴν Συρίαν ἔχοντες καὶ τὴν Μηδίαν (τελευταῖος δ᾽ ὑπῆρξεν Ὀρόντης ἀπόγονος Ὑδάρνου τῶν ἑπτὰ Περσῶν ἑνός) εἶθ᾽ ὑπὸ τῶν Ἀντιόχου τοῦ μεγάλου στρατηγῶν τοῦ πρὸς Ῥωμαίους πολεμήσαντος διῃρέθη δίχα, Ἀρταξίου τε καὶ Ζαριάδριος, καὶ ἦρχον οὗτοι τοῦ βασιλέως ἐπιτρέψαντος ἡττηθέντος δ᾽ ἐκείνου προσθέμενοι Ῥωμαίοις καθ᾽ αὑτοὺς ἐτάττοντο βασιλεῖς προσαγορευθέντες (Str 11,14,15) 1 2 On these dynastic connections and their impact on the Commagenian kingdom see the contribution by Canepa in this volume Cf the contribution by Strootman in this volume Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr 346 Giusto Traina Accordingly, Armenia was previously ruled by the Persians, the Macedonians, and the Seleucids Then it was split into two independent kingdoms3: Greater Armenia (Arm Mec Hayk‘) and Sophene (Cop‘k‘) 4The kings of the new states were Artaxias (Artašēs) and Zariadris (Zareh), former στρατηγοί of Antiochos III5: of course, in this case, στρατηγός means ‘governor’ more than ‘commander, general’ 6 The independence of Armenia and Sophene was the result of the treaty of Apameia in 188 BCE But what about Orontes, the last of the ‘subordinate governors’ who ruled Armenia and Sophene under the Seleucids? Strabo implies that the Orontids did not have royal status Yet, as we will see, this contradicts the evidence from the inscriptions of Commagene and the Armenian tradition Fig. 1 Armenia after the treaty of Apameia in 188 BCE, from Mutafian – Van Lauwe 2001 Before considering the ‘Orontid connection’ to ancient Armenia, we need to review the evidence of Str 11,14,15 All modern translators of Strabo interpreted this passage according to the traditional reconstruction of the events Yet they – i e , we – overlooked a textual problem: the syntactic non-sequitur in the expression τελευταῖος ὑπῆρξεν Ὀρόντης Radt was aware of it Still, he claimed to solve the problem by giving the verb ὑπάρχω the sense of ‘to be a ὕπαρχος’ (a lieutenant or a subordinate ruler), 3 4 5 6 Patterson 2001 Toumanoff 1963; Garsoïan 1997; Traina 1999/2000; Traina 2017a; Traina 2017 b; Traina 2018a Strabo somehow applies to Armenia the well-known model of the succession of the world-ruling empires: Muccioli 2018, 116–118 See also Str 11,14,5; Grainger 1997, 83 122 Unfortunately, all modern translators – alas, me too – opt for ‘general’: Jones 1928, 337; Lasserre 1975, 130; Traina, in Nicolai – Traina 2000, 191; Radt 2004, 397; Roller 2014, 511 Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Armenia and the ‘Orontid Connection’ 347 instead of its most common meaning ‘to be’7, and eventually translated τελευταῖος ὑπῆρξεν Ὀρόντης “der letzte Statthalter war Orontes” Radt’s solution is less than satisfactory No occurrence of ὑπάρχω in Strabo’s Geography may be translated ‘to be a ὕπαρχος’ 8 To explain the inner contradiction in the text, we may not exclude a later gloss, as I suggested in a previous recent contribution 9 It is worth noting the unusual expression οἱ τὴν Συρίαν ἔχοντες καὶ τὴν Μηδίαν This is an interesting definition of the Seleucid Empire around the 3rd c BCE: a twofold space that included ‘Syria’ (as Roman historiographers called the Seleucid Empire) and ‘Media’, that is Iran, namely the Upper Satrapies At any rate, this passage of Strabo clearly shows the contradictions of his sources He was aware of the intermediary status of the Orontids, who de facto ruled Armenia, but did not retain royal status If Radt’s translation of τελευταῖος ὑπῆρξεν Ὀρόντης is right, we may argue that Strabo considers Orontes a sort of sub-ruler: in modern historical jargon, a ‘dynast’ In short, the Orontids ruled Armenia as ‘semi-independent dynasts’ 10 The text of the treaty signed in 179 BCE by several kings and princes of Asia minor mentions two Armenian rulers: Mithradates, a descendant of Zariadris, and Artaxias Neither is called a king: the former was “satrap of Armenia”, the latter “ruler (ἄρχων) of the most of Armenia” 11 So, just a few years after the granting of the royal title, they had been downgraded Possibly, the Seleucids refused to recognize their legitimacy, one of the side effects of the treaty of Apameia; in short, the independent kingdom of Artašēs was a creation of Roman diplomacy, but its status was not universally accepted On the other hand, we know from Polybios that the rulers of Sophene in the 3rd c BCE retained royal status 12 The earliest mention of an Orontid ruler/satrap of Armenia dates from ca 370 BCE: in the Anabasis, Xenophon recalls his march in 401/400 BCE through “Armenia, the large and prosperous province of which Orontas was ruler” 13 With some imagination, the late Janos Harmatta proposed to identify Orontes in the figure depicted on the silver rhyton found in 1968 at the foothill of the citadel of Erebuni (fig 2) 14 Indeed, Strabo highlights the nobility of the Orontids: the last dynast was Ὀρόντης ἀπόγονος Ὑδάρνου 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 As in Cass Dio 36,36,3 71,34,3 The only passage of the Geography where ὕπαρχος means ‘subordinate governor’ is 11,12,8, concerning Strabo’s uncle Moaphernes, who Mithridates Eupator appointed governor and administrator of Media Atropatene Traina 2017a, 380 Kuhrt – Sherwin-White 1993, 192; Kosmin 2014, 156 Capdetrey 2007, ch 7, rightly makes the difference between “espace contrôlé” and “territoire administré” Pol 25,11–12 Pol 8,25 (Exc Peir P 26) Xen An 3,5,17; see Xen An 4,3,4 Harmatta 1979, 308–309; Facella 2006, 131–135 Treister 2015, 63–64, is more cautious On the context of this find, discovered in an archaeological context outside the fortress of Erebuni, see Dan 2015, 16 Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr 348 Giusto Traina Fig. 2 Erevan, Erebuni Museum, Silver rhyton dating from the Achaemenid period, ©Roberto Dan τῶν ἑπτὰ Περσῶν ἑνός “the descendant of Hydarnes” Rüdiger Schmitt correctly defines their status under the Achaemenids and the Seleucids: Hydarnes “seems to have been rewarded by the Great King as quasi-hereditary satrap of Armenia, since his descendants apparently held this office until Hellenistic times, up to the Orontes, etc ” 15 The first Orontid also appears in both versions of stele 6 from the western and the eastern terraces of Antiochos’ hierothesion at Nemrud Dağ (fig 3) 16 In the list of the king’s ancestors, Orontes can be identified with Ἀροάνδης, the son of the ‘king’s eye’ Artasyras Aroandes/Orontes had a key role within Antiochos’ genealogy, as he provided the Commagenian dynasty with an Achaemenid ancestor It is hard to say whether this genealogic connection was correct, or rather it was a sort of ‘invention of tradition’ In any case, Antiochos’ ancestors were the dynasts of Armenia and Sophene 17 Is this genealogy reliable, or was it manipulated by the king? Rolf Strootman argues that “Antiochos Epiphanes, himself the son of a Seleukid princess, likely wanted to use his inherited charisma to unite all Armenian lands, and in the process may have been one of several rulers who sought to create a new ‘world empire’ on the foundations of the former Seleucid state” 18 Se non è vero, è ben trovato 15 16 17 18 Schmitt 2004 Lerouge 2013, 113 claims that the Orontids too, as well as other hellenized kings, “affirment certes leurs racines perses, mais ils le font par le truchement de la culture grecque” OGIS 391/392; IGLS 17 and 3; Facella 2009, 95–97 (see SEG 60, 1640) An useful synthesis in Strootman 2016, 219–220, although his definition of ‘Armenia’, including both Greater Armenia and Sophene, is a bit questionable As a matter of fact, we are informed of the genesis of the kingdoms of Armenia and Sophene, but there are still many blanks: for example, the rise of Lesser Armenia See also Marciak 2017, 114–118 Strootman 2016, 308 Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Armenia and the ‘Orontid Connection’ 349 Fig. 3 Inscription on the back of stele 6 (depicting Aroandas [Orontes] on its front) from Nemrud Dağ, from Sanders 1996 2, 215 fig 407 Fig. 4 Distribution map of stelae of Artašēs I, from Khatchadourian 2007 However, both the dynasties of Commagene and Greater Armenia claimed an Orontid heritage This is shown by the Aramaic inscriptions engraved in the boundary stelae of Artašēs, found in several sites in the Republic of Armenia, where the use of Aramaic language may be considered, as Lori Khatchadourian argues, “an overt alignment with Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr 350 Giusto Traina Fig. 5 Erevan, History Museum Stele of Artašēs I, from http://campusnumeriquearmenien org the Achaemenid past”19 or, more simply, a rupture with the Seleucid power (figs 4 and 5) In most inscriptions the king presents himself as the son of Zareh 20 Still, all the same claims lineage to Orontes, maybe to strengthen his legitimation by a royal pedigree dating back to the Achaemenids Another piece of evidence for the royal status of the Orontids is one of the Greek inscriptions found in Armawir, a collection of texts of some importance for the citadel 21 On the only surviving rock (the other was partly destroyed in WW2), a short inscription bears the greeting formula βασιλεὺς Ἀρμαδοείρων / Μίθρας Ὀρόντῃ / βασιλεῖ χαίρειν “Mithras, king of Armawir, greets king Orontes” 22 19 20 21 22 Khatchadourian 2007, 52 Marciak 2017, 117–118 only cites two stelae This is a sort of equivalent of the epigraphic series engraved on the walls of sanctuaries or public buildings in Anatolia For a state of the art, see Traina 2018a In l 1, all the editors reported ὁ βασιλεὺς, but of course this is wrong: the correct formula starts with βασιλεύς: the alleged ho mikron is just a dent in the rock Moreover, in l 3 there is no need to read <Εὐ>ρόντῃ or <Ἐβ>ρόντῃ), as suggested by the former editors (and still followed by Marciak 2017, 119): the inscription has the classical form Ὀρόντης Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Armenia and the ‘Orontid Connection’ 351 Fig. 6 Ancient citadel near the village of Nor Armavir Detail of the rock with Greek inscriptions, ©Giusto Traina Usually, the epigraphical dossier of Armawir is dated from the end of the 3rd c to the mid-2nd c BCE; the Orontes greeted by Mithras in the top inscription is commonly identified with the last Orontid Still, nothing says that all texts date from the same period Although we ignore the content of Mithras’ letter, the inscription highlights the relationship between a local ruler and a satrap/governor, both calling each other ‘king’ In fact, we do not necessarily need to identify this Orontes with the last Orontid: he could be any Orontid Possibly, the prominent position of the inscription in the rock hints at the most important document kept in the local archive 23 Therefore, we could infer that Mithras’ letter was sent to the founder of the Orontid dynasty But let’s not overdo it with the ben trovato A section of Movsēs Xorenac‘i’s History of Armenia transmits another account of the passage from the Orontids to the Artaxiads As this is a very long text, I made a reader’s digest: “Once upon there lived a king who ruled the Eastern Armenian highlands: his name was Eruand He was the son of ‘a certain woman of the Arsacid family, fat of body, horribly ugly, and libidinous’, who begot him and his brother Eruaz Eruand was the overseer of 23 Traina 2018a Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr 352 Giusto Traina king Sanatruk, who had been converted to Christianity by the apostle Thaddaeus When Sanatruk died, Eruand became king of Armenia in the eighth year of the last Dareh (Darius) Suspecting of Sanatruk’s sons, he slaughtered all of them but Artašēs, then a child His wet nurse brought Artašēs to Persarmenia and also informed his foster-father Smbat, who lived in Western Armenia, in the province of Sper (present-day İspir), the homeland of the Bagratid family Smbat took the child with him and wandered for a long time in the highlands, helped by the local shepherds and herdsmen, until he managed to join Dareh Eruand vainly tried to convince the Persian king to surrender him Artašēs; he eventually went after Smbat’s supporters, who were looking after his daughters in Bayberd (Bayburt), not far from Sper A tributary king of Rome, Eruand ingratiated himself with Vespasian and Titus by granting them Mesopotamia He transferred his court from the site of Armawir to a new place, located at the junction of the rivers Arak's and Axurean, that he named Eruandašat He also built a smaller city, called Bagaran ‘the place of the Altars’, where he transferred the idols from Armawir, appointing great priest his brother Eruaz He also built and embellished another town called Eruandakert While young Artašēs was growing up, his foster-father Smbat fought valiantly against the enemies of the Persians The king of kings agreed to bestow him a gift, and Smbat obtained Darius’ help to put Artašēs on the Armenian throne With the young Artašēs, Smbat marched with an army against the province of Utik‘, but Eruand fled to Eruandašat to gather the troops The Armenian princes in Utik‘, who Eruand had left behind, were scared by the force led by Smbat and Artašēs; moreover, they realized that the Romans were not supporting Eruand, and they finally abandoned him, despite his generous, yet less than disinterested gifts Smbat and Artašēs marched through central Armenia until Eruand’s camp Artašēs convinced the noble Argam, a descendant of the Mede Aždahak (Astyages), to desert Eruand Attacked by the valiant Armenian knights, the Iberians of king P‘arsman fled away Eruand’s army was slaughtered A squad of ‘brave men’ from the mountains of the Taurus attacked Artašēs, but Gisak, the son of his wet nurse, fought them and eventually died to save Artašēs’ life Subsequently, Artašēs arrived at Eruand’s capital, where Smbat was waiting for him After the first attack, the garrison of the fortress surrendered A soldier struck Eruand with his saber, and he died after a reign of twenty years As Eruand had some Arsacid blood, Artašēs ordered to bury him in an honorable way, with funerary columns Smbat entered the city and ‘finding the crown of King Sanatruk, he placed it on Artašēs’ head and made him king over all of Armenia in the twenty-ninth year of Dareh, king of Persia’ Then Smbat went after Eruand’s brother, Eruaz, killed him and settled his slaves in a town behind mount Masis (present-day Ararat) He named the place with the same name Bagaran, then went to Persia bearing to Darius, by order of Artašēs, the treasures of the first Bagaran But when Smbat was away, the Roman army arrived at Franz Steiner Verlag Armenia and the ‘Orontid Connection’ 353 Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr the Armenian border, imposing the payment of taxes Then, Artašēs had to pay a double tribute” 24 Xorenac‘i claims that this epic history “is accurately told by Ołimp (Olympios), priest of (H)ani, composer of temple histories, as are also many other deeds that we have to relate and to which the books of the Persians and the epic songs of the Armenians bear witness”25 Xorenac‘i also mentions a Greek source of the 3rd c CE, Iulius Africanus, which seems to give the framework for a large part of his second book 26 In fact, as usual, Xorenac‘i combines local oral traditions with Greek and Roman sources; the result is a chronological hodgepodge, spanning at least four centuries He dates the accessions of Eruand and Artašēs to the Armenian throne, respectively, in the eighth and the twenty-ninth year of the reign of Dareios III: but the last Achaemenid king did not rule more than six years 27 This does not match the timeline at all, as Xorenac‘i dates the war between Eruand and Artašēs to the second half of the 1st c CE, as he mentions Vespasian, Titus, and P’arsman (Pharasmanes) king of Iberia 28 Moreover, Xorenac‘i links the whole story to the Arsacid dynasty: Artašēs gave Eruand respect to his Arsacid blood In fact, Xorenac‘i’s chronological system presents two different Parthian (that is, Arsacid) kings named Artašēs: the first defeated the Lydian Chroesus, the second Eruand A similar confusion may be found in the Primary History, where Eruand is embedded in the genealogy of the Armenian Arsacids, and Artašēs is considered his brother Such documentary chaos justifies the harsh criticisms shared by several Armenian scholars, especially in the West The late Robert Thomson, one of the most authoritative specialists and the author of a translation of Xorenac‘i’s History, said: “It is at once the most significant historical work in Classical Armenian literature and the most controversial […] since there were no sources written in the Armenian language until the invention of the script circa A D 400, Moses has preserved much that was handed down by word of mouth; and indeed he quotes verbatim several short extracts from oral tales current in his own day But Moses also claims to be writing an authoritative history in which much has been based on archival sources written in other languages that give information about Armenia It was when this claim was to put to modern scholarly scrutiny 24 25 26 27 28 This account is an abridgement of Movsēs Xorenac‘i 2,37–48 Movsēs Xorenac‘i 2, 48 See Topchyan 2006; Gazzano 2016; Mari 2016 Under Darius III, a dignitary called Orontes was one of the commanders of the Armenian contingent at the battle of Gaugamela in 331 BCE (Arr Anab 3,8): he was very likely a descendant of Orontes I Maybe Xorenac‘i is confused with another Dareh, a Parthian Arsacid king who reigned thirty years according to the so-called Primary History, a chronicle transmitted in the manuscript tradition of the seventh century historian Sebēos (see Traina 2018b) Xorenac‘i supports his chronology with the fact that Sanatruk, the ruler of Armenia before Eruand, was a Christian convert: see van Esbroeck 1988 Franz Steiner Verlag 354 Giusto Traina Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr that some doubts began to emerge concerning the reliability – or even the existence – of some of these early written sources And when known sources used by Moses were identified, the ways in which he used them for his own purposes led to suspicions concerning his untrustworthiness” 29 So much for Xorenac‘i? The story of Eruand and Artašēs is indeed one of the most desperate cases in the History of Armenia: although Xorenac‘i gives compelling evidence for the memory of pre-Christian Armenia in late Antiquity, he is quite useless for any historical reconstruction On the other hand, he provides evidence of a violent dynastic shift, that supports Str 11,14,15 Despite Artašēs’ claim of Orontid legitimacy, as he shows in his boundary stelae, the Armenian epic traditions preferred to highlight a dynastic break from the Orontids to the Arsacids In his simplified abridgment of the earliest history of Greater Armenia, Strabo shared this version, but with a significant difference: he did not attribute to the Orontids a royal title Yet, as we have seen, the situation was more complicated, as shows the title of βασιλεύς in the inscription of Armawir However, the sentence τελευταῖος δ᾽ ὑπῆρξεν Ὀρόντης ἀπόγονος Ὑδάρνου τῶν ἑπτὰ Περσῶν ἑνός seems awkward and does not explain the relations between the last Orontes and Artaxias and Zariadris (and, of course, we cannot exclude a gloss) Future studies on ancient Commagene should not overlook the importance of Orontid kingship in the Armenian tradition, keeping in mind the connected historical and philological problems Bibliography Capdetrey 2007: L Capdetrey, Le pouvoir séleucide Territoire, administration, finances d’un royaume hellénistique (312–129 av J -C ) (Rennes 2007) Dan 2015: R Dan, From the Armenian Highland to Iran A Study on the Relations between the Kingdom of Urartu and the Achaemenid Empire (Rome 2015) van Esbroeck 1988: M van Esbroeck, L’apôtre Thaddée et le roi Sanatruk, in: M Nordio – B L Zekiyan (eds ), Atti del II Simposio Internazionale “Armenia-Assiria” Istituzioni e poteri nell’epoca Il-Khanide (Venice 1988) 83–106 Facella 2006: M Facella, La dinastia degli Orontidi nella Commagene ellenistico-romana (Pisa 2006) Facella 2009: M Facella, Darius and the Achaemenids in Commagene, in: P Briant – M Chauveau (eds ), Organisation des pouvoirs et contacts culturels dans les pays de l’empire achéménide (Paris 2009) 379–414 Garsoïan 1997: N G Garsoïan, The Emergence of Armenia, in: R G Hovanissian (ed ), The Armenian People from Ancient to Modern Times 1 The Dynastic Periods From Antiquity to the Fourteenth Century, (New York 1997) 37–62 29 Thomson 1994, 84 Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr Armenia and the ‘Orontid Connection’ 355 Gazzano 2016: F Gazzano, Croesus’ Story in the History of Armenia of Movsēs Xorenac‘i, in: F Gazzano – L Pagani – G Traina (eds ), Greek Texts and Armenian Traditions (Berlin 2016) 83–113 Grainger 1997: J D Grainger, A Seleukid Prosopography and Gazetteer (Leiden 1997) Harmatta 1979: J Harmatta, Royal Power and Immortality The Myth of the Two Eagles in Iranian Royal Ideology, ActaAntHung 27, 1979, 305–319 Jones 1928: H L Jones (ed and tr ), Strabo, Geography, Volume 5 Books 10–12, Loeb Classical Library 211 (Cambridge/MA 1928) Khatchadourian 2007: L Khatchadourian 2007, Unforgettable Landscapes Attachments to the Past in Hellenistic Armenia, in: N Yoffee (ed ), Negotiating the Past in the Past (Tucson 2007) 43–75 Lerouge-Cohen 2013: C Lerouge-Cohen, La référence aux “Sept” dans les royaumes gréco-iraniens de l’époque hellénistique La survivance d’un usage achéménide?, Ktema 38, 2013, 107– 114 Kosmin 2014: P J Kosmin, The Land of the Elephant Kings Space, Territory, and Ideology in the Seleucid Empire (Cambridge/MA 2014) Kuhrt – Sherwin-White 1993: A Kuhrt – S Sherwin-White, From Samarkhand to Sardis A New Approach to the Seleucid Empire (Berkeley 1993) Lasserre 1975: F Lasserre (ed and tr ), Strabon, Géographie, Tome 8 Livre 11 (Anatolie) (Paris 1975) Marciak 2017: M Marciak, Sophene, Gordyene, and Adiabene Three Regna Minora of Northern Mesopotamia Between East and West (Leiden 2017) Mari 2016: F Mari, Cyrus the Great in Movsēs Xorenac‘i, Patmut‘iwn Hayoc‘ Telescoping the King, in: F Gazzano – L Pagani – G Traina (eds ), Greek Texts and Armenian Traditions (Berlin 2016) 115–141 Muccioli 2018: F Muccioli, L’anello debole della catena? L’egemonia macedone nella tradizione antica sulla translatio imperii, in: L R Cresci – F Gazzano (eds ), De imperiis L’idea di impero universale e la successione degli imperi nell’antichità (Rome 2018) 81–135 Mutafian – Van Lauwe: C Mutafian – É Van Lauwe, Atlas historique de l’Arménie (Paris 2001) Nicolai – Traina 2000: R Nicolai – G Traina (ed and tr ), Strabone, Geografia, Caucaso, Asia centrale e Anatolia Libri 11–12 (Milan 2000) Patterson 2001: L E Patterson, Rome’s Relationship with Artaxias I of Armenia, AncHistB 15, 2001, 154–162 Radt 2004: Stefan Radt (ed and tr ), Strabons Geographika, Band 3, Buch 9–13 Text und Übersetzung (Göttingen 2004) Roller 2014: D W Roller, The Geography of Strabo An English Translation, with Introduction and Notes (Cambrige 2014) Sanders 1996: D H Sanders, Nemrud Dağı The Hierothesion of Antiochus I of Commagene Results of the American Excavations Directed by Theresa B Goell (Winona Lake 1996) Schmitt 2004: Encyclopaedia Iranica XII,6 (2004) 588–590 s v Hydarnes (R Schmitt) Strootman 2016: R Strootman, The Heroic Company of My Forebears The Seleukid and Achaemenid Ancestor Galleries of Antiochos I of Kommagene at Nemrut Dağı and the Role of Royal Women in the Transmission of Hellenistic Kingship, in: A Coşkun – A. McAuley (eds.), Seleukid Royal Women. Creation, Representation and Distortion of Hellenistic Queenship in the Seleukid Empire (Stuttgart 2016) 209–230 Thomson 1994: R W Thomson, Moses Khorenatsi, in: J A C Greppin (ed ), Studies in Classical Armenian Literature (Delmar 1994) 84–100 Franz Steiner Verlag Open Access Download von der Franz Steiner Verlag eLibrary am 18.09.2021 um 17:04 Uhr 356 Giusto Traina Topchyan: A Topchyan, The Problem of the Greek Sources of Movsēs Xorenac‘i’s History of Armenia (Leuven 2006) Toumanoff 1963: C Toumanoff, The Orontids of Armenia, in: Studies in Christian Caucasian History (Washington 1963) 277–354 Traina 1999/2000: G Traina, Épisodes de la rencontre avec Rome (IIe siècle av J -Chr –IIIe siècle ap J -Chr ), Iran and the Caucasus 3/4, 1999/2000, 59–78 Traina 2017a: G Traina, Rois ou dynastes ? Les territoires arméniens à l’époque d’Antiochos III, in: C Feyel – L Graslin-Thomé (eds ), Antiochos III et l’Orient (Nancy 2017) 377–388 Traina 2017b: G Traina, Strabo and the History of Armenia, in: D Dueck (ed ), The Routledge Companion to Strabo (London 2017) 93–101 Traina 2018a: G Traina, Les inscriptions grecques d’Armawir (Arménie) Considérations préliminaires, in: S Magnani (ed ), Domi forisque Omaggio a Giovanni Brizzi (Bologna 2018) 289–304 Traina 2018b: G Traina, The Armenian Primary History A Source of Procopius?, in: G Greatrex – S Janniard (eds ), Le monde de Procope/The World of Procopius (Paris 2018) 173–182 Treister 2015: M Y Treister, A Hoard of Silver Rhyta of the Achaemenid Circle from Erebuni, AncCivScytSib 21, 2015, 23–119 Giusto Traina Professor of Roman History Sorbonne Université giusto traina@sorbonne-universite fr Franz Steiner Verlag