The Poison King: The Life and Legend of Mithradates, Rome's Deadliest Enemy

by Adrienne Mayor

  When pressed to the wall, when all seemed lost, Mithradates had a long history of successfully slipping away and eluding pursuit. It is not difficult to imagine that, with the help of the old general Metrophanes, father and son might have negotiated a bargain. When the plot was first discovered, Mithradates still held the upper hand. The stakes were high for both men. For Pharnaces, it was life or death. Only by agreeing to Mithradates’ conditions could he survive to inherit his father’s kingdom. Mithradates, after a half century of dealing with Romans, knew Rome would never allow him to rule in peace. His plan to invade Italy lacked crucial support, and Pharnaces was his chosen successor. If he forgave his son, Mithradates could pass the crown to his designated heir and promise to disappear completely in exchange for safe passage and a ruse to convince Pompey that he was dead.

  Pharnaces carried his great-grandfather’s Persian name and had been raised within Persian culture. He named his son Darius, and the mother of his daughter Dynamis was probably a Sarmatian (later, as queen of the Bosporus, Dynamis wore an Amazon-Persian-style headdress decorated with Zoroastrian Sun symbols). Perhaps Mithradates discerned a strong strain of his own independent spirit in this son. Indeed, as king Pharnaces would retrace his father’s path: after a peaceful early reign as a Friend of Rome, he would take advantage of the Roman civil war to suddenly rebel, marching a large army, with scythed chariots and a strong cavalry, across Colchis and into Pontus in a quixotic quest to recover his father’s old kingdom.23

  Fig. 15.6. Queen Dynamis, bronze bust. As ruler of the Bosporan Kingdom, Mithradates’ granddaughter wears a star-studded Persian-Phrygian cap like those of Amazons and Zoroastrians. The Hermitage, St. Petersburg. Photo, M. Rostovtzeff 1919.

  So let us imagine that at the crisis of Pharnaces’ attempted coup in 63 BC, father and son acknowledged each other as equals at the bargaining table, facilitated by Metrophanes. They would have sworn a sacred oath by the gods Men and Mithra that allowed them both to survive with honor. Then they could work out the details of the grand illusion.

  Now let’s replay the events according to the script that might have been composed by Pharnaces and Mithradates. A large, robust corpse that could pass as Mithradates had to be discovered in the tower and shipped to Pompey. Any veteran cavalryman was likely to have the requisite battle scar on the thigh; the face could be easily obliterated beyond recognition with corrosive lime or acid. One cannot help wondering whether the faithful cavalry officer Bituitus volunteered for this supreme sacrifice. Mithradates’ armor, scepter, crown, and other regalia would complete the illusion. Old retainers, perhaps Gaius or Metrophanes, could confirm the identification of the body for Pompey.

  Keeping his part of the bargain, Mithradates dons ordinary traveling clothes and steals away by night, something he had done many times in the past (perhaps his castle had secret exits, like Hannibal’s in Bithynia). The king takes his weapons and what treasures he can carry: gold coins, favorite agate rings, some valuable papers. Where would he go? Escape by sea was impossible. The only safe route was north.

  Mithradates could ride out and join any one of the Scythian or Sarmatian tribes on the steppes. Their ideals and physical prowess were compatible with his, and he could speak their languages. Mithradates had experienced a nomadic lifestyle in his youth and early reign, and during his evasions of Lucullus and Pompey. He had recently renewed his friendships with the nomad chieftains. Pharnaces had maintained good relations with these tribes. Two intriguing facts lend support to the idea of an escape into Scythia. Mithradates’ son by Adobogiona, Mithradates of Pergamon, was ruler of the Bosporan Kingdom after Pharnaces. During an uprising, this Mithradates really did take refuge among the Scythians. Mithradates’ granddaughter Dynamis, queen of the Bosporan Kingdom during the time of Augustus, also went into exile for a time—she was sheltered by a Sarmatian tribe, perhaps that of her mother.24

  Who would have accompanied Mithradates into secret exile? Perhaps Bituitus, if he survived (his fate is not recorded). And surely Hypsicratea—or perhaps she and the king had already arranged a rendezvous (see plate 8). There are ancient precedents for imagining a “posthistorical” second life for Mithradates and Hypsicratea in the lands beyond the Black Sea. In romances about heroes and heroines of Greek myth, for example, Achilles and Helen of Troy were paired in an idyllic after-life. They never met in the Troy of Homer’s Iliad, but in popular lore the couple enjoyed “an extraordinary post mortem existence” as lovers in a mythical Black Sea paradise. Notably, the 1707 opera Mitridate by Scarlatti offers an alternate history in which Mithradates and Hypsicratea disguise themselves as Egyptian envoys.25

  An obscure will-o’-the-wisp legend, mentioned by Edward Gibbon in Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (1776–88), even gives Mithradates his final revenge. I have traced this tradition back to medieval Norse saga, in which a barbarian tribe from the Sea of Azov, allied with Mithradates, carried on his dream of one day invading Italy. Led by their chieftain Odin, this tribe was said to have escaped Roman rule after Pompey’s victory, by migrating to northern Europe and Scandinavia. They became the Goths, who, still inspired by Mithradates’ old struggle, avenged his defeat by overwhelming the Roman Empire. In the vision of the poet William Wordsworth, this old tale tells

  How vanquished Mithridates, northward passed,

  And, hidden in the cloud of years, became

  Odin, the Father of a Race by whom

  Perished the Roman Empire. . . .26

  And so let us suppose that on a May morning in 63 BC, riding across the vast expanse of green grass carpeted with wild red peonies, Mithradates sheds his royal skin and chooses a nomad’s life for the rest of his natural days. In this story, he and Hypsicratea would live among the “untamed” men and women who loved to roam the boundless plains. In the vision limned by the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus, the steppe nomads were “tall, handsome, and robust people with piercing eyes,” who “wandered like happy fugitives from place to place,” dressed in furs and wool leggings, with blue tattoos, “living on the milk of their herds, wild cherries, and meat, never spending a night under a roof . . . eating and drinking, buying and selling, holding assemblies, and even sleeping on their steeds or in their wagons.” They were “no one’s subjects, none can even tell you where they are from, since they are conceived, born, and raised in faraway places.” Skilled warriors, “they delight in danger and warfare and do not know the meaning of slavery, since all are born of noble blood, and they choose as their chiefs those who are conspicuous for long experience as warriors.”27

  In this new life, our companions would have the leisure to share their life stories, Mithradates recounting the history of his kingdom, Hypsicratea telling of her free and equal people of Caucasia. Thanks to his Persian heredity and theriac, Mithradates could have lived another five, ten, or even twenty years had he not died in the tower in 63 BC.28 In time, death might have come to Mithradates in battle, on a hunting expedition, or quietly in sleep. He would die in eleutheria, freedom, confident of his exalted place in history and myth. Mithradates’ friends would have buried him in the nomads’ traditional way, with his horse and a modest cache of golden treasures and cameo rings, in an anonymous kurgan on the steppes.29

  Mithradates’ passing—whether it occurred in the tower as reported in 63 BC or later in secret exile—would have been mourned by the strong woman he liked to call by the masculine form of her name, Hypsicrates. Younger than Mithradates, perhaps in her forties, Hypsicratea still had good years ahead. How did she spend the rest of her life?

  What follows is a further speculation, based on the conditions of possibility set out in the ancient sources—and on new archaeological evidence. Let us begin with the name Hypsicratea/es. Only two instances of this name are known in the latter part of the first century BC. One is Mithradates’ Amazon friend Hypsicratea. The other is a mysterious historian named Hypsicrates, who was also associated with Pontus and the Black Sea Kingdom. Coincidence? Or is there a more intere
sting explanation for this doubling of a very rare name?

  FIG. 15.7 Julius Caesar. Kunsthistorisches Museum, Vienna, Austria, photo by Andrew Bossi, Wikipedia Commons, cc-by-sa-2.5.

  Little is known about the shadowy figure called Hypsicrates. The historian turns up after 47 BC, some sixteen years after Mithradates’ death in 63 BC, when Julius Caesar crushed Pharnaces’ attempt to regain his father’s lost kingdom. Taking over Pontus, Caesar freed a prisoner of war named Hypsicrates at Amisus. This Hypsicrates accompanied Caesar as his historian on campaigns and wrote treatises on the history, geography, and military affairs of Pontus and the Bosporan Kingdom.

  Hypsicrates’ works have not survived, but they were quoted by other historians. Strabo of Pontus cited Hypsicrates as an authority on two highly significant topics: the military fortifications of the Bosporan Kingdom, and the lifestyle and customs of the Amazons of the Caucasus region. Notably, Strabo mentioned Hypsicrates along with another close friend of Mithradates, the philosopher Metrodorus. Josephus quoted Hypsicrates on the campaigns of Julius Caesar and on Mithradates of Pergamon. Lucian, a Syrian from Samosata (second century AD), described Hypsicrates as a “historian from Amisus who mastered many sciences.” There is one more salient detail. Hypsicrates, he died old. According to Lucian’s list of remarkably long lives, Hypsicrates lived to be ninety-two.30

  This set of striking coincidences linking Hypsicratea and Hypsicrates has been overlooked by modern scholars, apparently because of the gender difference. But we recall that Mithradates called Hypsicratea by the male form of her name. Mithradates’ intellectual and athletic equal, she lived a manly life, riding, hunting, and making war. The name “Hypsicratea” disappeared from the historical record after 63 BC, the year Mithradates’ death was reported. Everything we know about the person known as Hypsicrates, especially the topics of expertise attributed to him—Amazons and Mithradates’ kingdom—points to someone very close to Mithradates (and the notably long life could even hint at access to Mithridatium).

  I suggest that the historian writing under the name Hypsicrates was none other than Mithradates’ beloved companion, Hypsicratea.

  The newfound inscription for the statue honoring Hypsicratea, described earlier, lends support to this idea. The statue was probably erected during the reign of Mithradates’ granddaughter, Queen Dynamis, who knew Hypsicratea. Amazingly, the text of the inscription spells her name with es, Hypsicrates, the masculine form of Hypsicratea. We now know that this was not just a private nickname, but that Mithradates’ companion was in fact publicly known as Hypsicrates.

  FIG. 15.8. Inscription honoring Hypsicratea, discovered in Phanagoria. Her name is given in the masculine form: “Hypsikrates wife of Mithradates.” Photo courtesy of Jakob Munk Højte, after V. Kuznetzov, “Novye nadpisi iz Fanagorii,” 2007.

  FIG. 15.9. Portrait of Mithradates, seventeenth-century marble copy of ancient original. Racine’s tragedy, Mithridate (1673) was a favorite of Louis XIV, the Sun King (1638–1715). Amphitheater of the Grand Trianon garden, Grand Canal, Versailles, MR 2488, 85 cm/33 in high. Réunion des Musées Nationaux/Art Resource, NY.

  So let us suppose that at some point after 63 BC, Hypsicratea returned to Pontus. Perhaps disguised as a man she took up a scholarly life at Amisus, and was captured by Caesar after the battle at Zela in 47 BC. Another possibility is that she was fighting on Pharnaces’ side and was taken prisoner by Caesar’s soldiers. The lot of a female captive was not enviable. A permanent male persona as Hypsicrates would be advantageous. Caesar, impressed by this person’s unique knowledge of Mithradates’ kingdom and recent history—and possibly even aware of the gender switch and true identity—made Hypsicrates his personal historian. Even the politics of this association are fitting. Mithradates and his circle were pro-Marius, foes of Sulla and Pompey. Caesar was pro-Marius, and an enemy of Sulla and Pompey.

  Who was more qualified than Hypsicratea to preserve the story of Mithradates and his kingdom? She had loved Mithradates and fought by his side. She knew the king’s store of personal anecdotes, desires, and accomplishments. If Hypsicratea later wrote as the historian Hypsicrates, she may well have been the source of many of the details about Mithradates’ character and reign that were preserved by other ancient historians. Mithradates, from the beginning, was the self-conscious author of his own life. Through Hypsicratea/es, he could also have been responsible for his own legend.

  I have sketched a continuation of Mithradates’ story as a historical thought experiment, but in reality Mithradates enjoyed a vital afterlife in history, science, and popular legend for more than two thousand years after his death (appendix 2). In his relentless resistance to Rome, Mithradates, the savior born under an Eastern star, represented a genuine alternative to Roman imperialism in the turbulent last days of the Republic. Some sixty years after Mithradates’ death, another savior and champion of Truth and Light was born under a different Eastern star. In the turn of the millennium, in the new world that emerged from Mithradates’ armed resistance and the Republic’s military response, that new King of Kings would challenge and eventually win over the mighty Roman Empire, but not by force of arms.

  Mithradates battled against the tide of history. This intrepid, complex, ideological leader ultimately failed to conquer Rome by violence and war. Yet, if we let Rome stand for tyranny, the grandeur of Racine’s vision of Mithradates’ legacy still rings true:

  Take charge. Let us, following your name,

  Live up to being your sons everywhere we go.

  Set dusk and dawn on fire by your hands;

  Fill the universe without ever leaving the Bosporus;

  May the Romans, hard pressed from one end of the world to the other,

  Be unsure where you will be, and find you everywhere.31

  APPENDIX ONE

  Mythic Hero or Deviant Personality?

  THE FOLLOWING sections discuss Mithradates’ scores on two, very different, “diagnostic” tools: first, the traits of traditional mythic heroes and, second, the characteristics of personality disorders. Both measures should be taken with generous grains of salt; both lists are susceptible to misuse and necessarily entail anachronistic assumptions based on incomplete knowledge.

  THE MYTHIC HERO SCRIPT

  Mithradates’ extraordinary life story fulfills the expectations for mythic heroes, first identified by Otto Rank in 1914 and elaborated by Lord Fitzroy Raglan in 1936. Rank’s basic model is summarized in six steps: (1) Prophecy surrounds birth; (2) Divine, aristocratic, or royal parents; (3) Abandoned, given or sent away, separated; (4) Rescued or reared by foster parents or surrogates; (5) Return to the land of father, proves his worthiness; (6) Claims royal birthright and wins honors.

  Raglan’s twenty-two heroic attributes overlap with Rank’s, except for “prophecies,” number 23 in the following composite list, adapted from Rank, Raglan, and Dundes 1990. Here is my scoring rationale for Mithradates’ perfect score of 23. His very high ranking is overdetermined: several traits receive multiple points.

  1. Mother is a princess. Queen Laodice was a Seleucid princess.

  2. Father is a king. King Mithradates V Euergetes.

  3. Parents are related or have complex relationship. They may have been remote kin; both had entangled Macedonian and Persian family trees. Relationship complicated: Laodice was suspected of complicity in the murder of her husband.

  4. Unusual circumstances before birth. The rare, spectacular comet of 135 BC coincided with Mithradates’ conception.

  5. Reputed to be son of or sent by gods.Mithradates’ name means “sent by Mithra”; his authority to rule was bestowed by Mithra. In ancient Iranian belief, the king was sacred, descended from the Sun god. Mithradates’ birth fulfilled oracles predicting a savior-king rising in the East. He was compared to the god Dionysus and the demigod Hercules, and he claimed both as ancestors. He also claimed descent from Alexander the Great, a revered cult figure by the first century BC. Mithradates himself was hailed as a god by followers. />
  6. Attempts to kill the hero during childhood, often by relatives. Young Mithradates’ enemies within the palace attempted to murder him; his mother was suspected of trying to poison him.

  7. Abandonment, exile, separation; escapes premature death. Mithradates survived a lightning strike as a baby. His father was murdered when Mithradates was a boy, abandoning him to a treacherous mother. Teenage Mithradates disappeared into the countryside for seven years, again escaping premature death. Another long sojourn, during which he was presumed dead, occurred early in his reign. As a young man, he escaped another poisoning plot by his sister-wife.

  8. Grows up in a faraway land, among peasants and wild animals. Mithradates survived and grew strong in the countryside, hunting and living off the land for seven years, encountering remote mountain folk. In his second long expedition incognito, he visited his future dominions.

  9. Little is known of childhood. Very few details exist about Mithradates’ childhood; his teen years are shrouded in mystery.

  10. Upon reaching adulthood, returns to kingdom. After seven years, Mithradates returned to his Pontic Kingdom. After losing his kingdom in adulthood, he regained it again; he lost it once more but recovered his Bosporan Kingdom.

  11. Victory over powerful enemies. Mithradates overcame dangerous enemies at court, got rid of his mother and other rivals. He also won sweeping victories over the Romans.

  12. Marries a princess, daughter of his enemy or predecessor. Mithradates married his own sister, Princess Laodice—not only the daughter of his predecessor (his father) but also the daughter of his enemy (his mother).