Hello,
I think that it is time to clean up the tree around Ioannes Mystacon.
First, let us go over the genealogically relevant information about Moustakon that is known. He originated from Thrace, was the military commander of Armenia, and married Placidia. As far as genealogy is concerned, this is all.
Sources: Christian Settipani, Continuité des élites à Byzance durant les siècles obscurs: les princes caucasiens et l'empire du VIe au IXe siècle, pg 122-126
For Placidia’s family: The House of Anastasius by Alan Cameron, pg 273. https://grbs.library.duke.edu/article/viewFile/7451/4919
The Geni tree, as it currently stands, has Moustakon as the son of Ióannés and Praeiecta, and the father of Florus Valentinian, N.N., son of Johannes Moustakon Arscruni (who is the father of Manuel Arshakuni ) and Euphemia of Byzantium.
Right off the bat, there is no proof for any of these connections except to his wife. They originate from theoretical exercises by historians and genealogists like Settipani and their current representation on Geni is a confused mishmash of the four different, purely hypothetical, genealogical trees that Settipani constructs in his book Continuité des élites à Byzance durant les siècles obscurs: les princes caucasiens et l'empire du VIe au IXe siècle.
I managed to get my hands on Settipani’s book (thank you, University of Texas at Austin, for sending it to me!) and the reasoning that Settipani uses goes something like this: The 7th century Armenian historian, Sebeos, mentions that Constans II, Eastern Roman Emperor supported a marriage between a relative of his and Prince Smbat V of Armenia and Sebeos also later mentions that the father-in-law of Smbat is Manuel Arshakuni. Now, how is Constans II related to Manuel Arshakuni? It cannot be through Constans II’s ancestors because the idea of them having Armenian origin has been disproved. See this discussion: https://www.geni.com/discussions/213651?msg=1392380 Therefore it could be through Constans II’s father-in-law, Valentinus, which makes sense because he was Armenian. So, Settipani assumes that Valentinus and Manuel are possibly brothers (a big assumption but somewhat reasonable as they are both from the Arsacid dynasty) (pg 117-8).
The name Valentinus for an Armenian prince is unusual, as Valentinus is a Roman name, not Armenian, and his daughter married a Roman prince, so Settipani postulates that maybe he had some Roman blood (pg 123). In order for him to be both Armenian and Roman there would need to be an alliance between Armenians and Romans in his ancestry. Now an example of this kind of alliance happened in the engagement between Artabanes and Praeiecta. This engagement was called off, but Artabanos clearly liked Roman women, so maybe he later remarried to a Roman woman and perhaps had a child with this possible Roman woman, and that child could have, theoretically, been Valentinus himself, or perhaps Valentinus’ father. Since there may have to be an intermediate generation between Valentinus and Artabanos, perhaps that man was Iustinus, military commander of Armenia in 606, for no other reason than that he fits the time-frame nicely. Settipani constructs three different family trees to imagine how this connection could have played out (pg 124-125).
Settipani also has a second hypothesis for that intermediate generation between Artabanos and Valentinus. Because Valentinus is called Valentinus, perhaps he is a distant descendent of the Roman Emperor Valentian III through his mother. Now there are three documented descendants of Valentian III in the sixth century. Of two of them nothing is known, so they are not useful, but one of them is Placidia, who married Ioannes Mystacon, and Moustakon (which was probably a nickname based on his moustache) is a figure whose life historians know a bit about. He was from Thrace, but since he was military commander of Armenia, Settipani suggests that he may have been of Armenian descent (as some military commanders of Armenia were) and since Artabanos was the military commander of Thrace, this also fits conveniently (pg 125-126).
To recap this complicated narrative: Settipani starts from the assumption that Valentinus and Manuel are brothers, then, because Valentinus is a Roman name, Settipani assumes that he had Roman ancestry as well as Armenia. Then, Settipani assumes that because of this he is the son or grandson of Artabanes, military commander of Thrace and of Armenian origin, because Artabanes had a failed engagement to a Roman woman. Next, Settipani can take his pick of military commanders of Armenia to fill the missing generation. Then, Settipani hypothesizes that Valentinus is a distant descendant of Valentian III because of the similarity in their names, this means that Settipani settles on Moustakon as a likely pick, because he assumes that he might theoretically be Armenian.
Now, where does this leave the Geni tree? I count at least 5 major assumptions in Settipani’s narrative, each without a shred of real historical evidence. Settipani is using these hypothetical family trees like this one to make an argument for the continuity of political power from the Roman Empire through the Dark Ages, challenging the traditional historiography that shows a sharp break between the Roman Empire and the Medieval world. Settipani’s prospographical/onomastic approach to Moustakon’s genealogy, while intriguing, unfortunately does not meet the requirements of the genealogical proof standard which we try to follow on Geni. Therefore, my suggestions would be to disconnect Ioannes Mystacon from his parents (perhaps with a note in his profile mentioning Settipani’s theory). Also, disconnect all of Moustakon’s children. I would not put Valentinus and Manuel Arshakuni as brothers, since their true relation is not known, just that they may have been related in some way (a note on their profiles is sufficient to demonstrate this).
Does anyone have any thoughts on this or sources to contribute to this discussion?
Sincerely,
Tamas Caldwell-Gilbert
