23. Alliances, Justin 38; Appian 13; Strabo 12.3.1–2. Memnon 22. Aulus Gellius 17.17 says 25 nations paid homage to M; the number was 22 according to Pliny 7.24.
24. Choice of Aquillius a mistake, even a provocation, according to Reinach 1890, 116–17.
25. Appian 11. Mastrocinque 1999, 47–58. Badian 1981, 56–58. Bithynia’s kings, Eder and Renger 2007, 99–100.
26. Appian 12. Roman Senate alarmed by M’s rise, but Aquillius “seriously underestimated” his military power and influence, McGing 1986, 81–88.
27. McGing 1986, 87–88. McGing 2009 (quote) reassesses M’s motives, arguing that he was not a compliant Hellenistic king, but his policy was cautious, “steady escalation” to achieve his great ambitions. Strabo 13.1.66.
28. Appian 12–14. Rutilius Rufus, Livy 70; Valerius Maximus 6.4; Cassius Dio 28; see Ussher 2007 for other ancient references. Appian’s sources, Ballesteros Pastor 2009. Mastrocinque 1999, 59–76; Rutilius Rufus, 54–58, 62–63; Sisenna as source for speech and dialogue, 69–79.
29. Although Appian’s account of the run-up to the war is “doubtless a literary expansion . . . it contains no basic improbabilities,” McGing 1986, 80, n53, citing Sherwin-White. Mastrocinque 1999, 59–72, suggests Appian’s main sources, Sisenna and Sulla, recorded the speeches. See Olbrycht 2009.
30. On M’s options before the first Mithradatic War, see Arslan 2007, 72–126, and Matyszak 2008, 29–33.
31. The foregoing: Appian 15–16; Memnon 22; Reinach 1890, 116–19. “Rickety throne,” Duggan 1959, 45. Aquillius as first example of developing Roman policy in the last years of the Republic, and the Senate’s waning power, McGing 1986, 81. Mastrocinque 1999, ch 2 and 3, portrays Aquillius in a positive light and believes the Senate was responsible for the ultimatum that caused the war; see ch 4 for these events.
32. Appian 17; Memnon 22.6.
• 7 •
VICTORY
1. Appian 17–18 had access to official archives, memoirs, and other documents. Memnon 22.6. The figures seem high to some scholars, but the relative strength is accepted. McGing 1986, 85 n72. Duggan 1959, 48, Appian gave “ration-strengths,” including porters, muleteers, grooms, servants, and so on. Ballesteros Pastor 1996, the figures reflect M’s extensive networks of alliances. According to the statistical-historical analysis by Swiss historian Pillonel (2005), Appian’s troop proportions were probably accurate, but the totals were exaggerated. Pillonel’s calculation suggests that, realistically, M commanded between 90,000 and 112,500 soldiers, against 36,000 to 45,000 Roman allied forces, with 16,800 to 21,000 recruits from Bithynia. Matyszak 2008, 34, points out that Romans often magnified enemy numbers; battle and maps, 35–38.
2. Duggan 1959, 48–56, for details of troops, weapons, and formations in this battle; and McGing 1986, 108–10. Fancy armaments, Plutarch Lucullus 7; cf Thucydides’ description (6.30–31) of the magnificent Athenian navy’s psychological impact in 415 BC. Later M stripped down to plain weaponry and warships, McGing 1986, 140; First Mithradatic War, 108–31.
3. Diodorus 16.86. Memnon 22.6–7 and see Munro 1901, 56.
4. Scythed chariots and ancient sources, Smith 1890, sv “falx,” 429. Antiochus the Great of Syria had some scythed chariots, but they were useless at his defeat at Magnesia in 189 BC because archers quickly took out the drivers.
5. The passage that follows integrates Lucretius’s descriptions in 3.656–700 and 5.1321.
6. The foregoing battle: Appian 17–18; Memnon 22. Leonardo da Vinci was fascinated by scythed chariots; drawings in Codex Arundel, folio 1030, 1487, British Museum, London.
7. Appian 18: M “treated the prisoners kindly and sent them to their homes with supplies for the journey, thus gaining a reputation for clemency.” I have guessed what M said to the prisoners, based on Appian 18–19 and M’s other speeches. Cf Diodorus 37.26. Plutarch Alexander 21, 30.6, Alexander’s humane treatment of prisoners of war. Glew 1977, 254–55. Cyrus the Great also released captives: Xenophon Cyrus 4.4.
8. “God and savior”: Diodorus 37.26; divine titles: Athenaeus 5; Cicero Pro Flacco 25 says M was addressed as Lord, Good Father, Savior of Asia, and Liberator. Anatolian gods “made manifest”: Mitchell 1995, 2:11 and ch 16. McGing 1986, 109, see 108–25 for beginning of Mithradatic Wars. Glew 1977 discusses the propaganda benefits of M’s reputation for “liberality” toward the enemy and imitation of Alexander, including mercy to enemies, and appeal of canceling debts.
9. These events, Appian 19. First Mithradatic War, Hind 1994, 144–49.
10. Cassius’s letter to Nysa, McGing 1986, 109 and n100; Welles 1974, 297–98. Mithradatic inscriptions at Nysa, Rigsby 1988, 149–52, and 1996, 400–403.
11. Apamea and Nysa: Strabo 12.8.18, 13.4.14. Mitchell 1995, 2:33.
12. Strabo 13.4.14. Bean 1989, 177–87, 203–4.
13. Welles 1974, 294–99. Mithradatic inscriptions in Nysa: Rigsby 1988, 149–53. M’s spies, Sheldon 2005, 74–77.
14. Welles 1974, 298.
15. McGing 1986, 110 and nn102 and 103.
16. Justin 38.3.7–9. Appian 20. Glew 1977, 254, M’s tent-site intended to win over Macedonians in Anatolia, and recalled Aristonicus.
17. Appian 20. Erciyas 2006, 23.
18. Bean 1989, 189.
19. McGing 1986, M’s allied cities, 94, 109–12. M’s coins circulated widely in Mediterranean and East: hoards discovered in Piraeus, Athens, Italy, Anatolian coast, Delos, Macedonia, mouth of Danube, Armenia, Ukraine, Taman Peninsula, Crimea, Albania, and Caucasia (Georgia and Azerbaijan). Hoards of M’s coins were buried around the Black Sea in about 85 BC, 75 BC, and 65 BC, dates reflecting crises of the three Mithradatic Wars. Erciyas 2006, 162–73; Saprykin 2004; Saprykin and Maslennikov 1995, 267, 271, 279; Callataÿ 2000; Levy 1994.
20. Italian appeal to M and his response: Diodorus 37.2.8–11. Erciyas 2006, 132–33.
21. Ballesteros Pastor 1996; McGing 1986, 114–18, 128–29, 131.
22. McGing 1986, 89, sees M using philhellenism as a “weapon to help him expand his kingdom” and a source of support for opposition to Rome; see also 107–8.
23. M’s huge armor at Nemea and Delphi, Appian 112. Quintilian 8.3.82, quoting fragment of Sallust Histories 2.77: M “being of huge stature, carried weapons of a proportionate size.” Cf Florus 1.7.4. Plutarch Alexander 62. La Penna 2003.
24. Justin 38.3–7 says Trogus preserved M’s speech as “indirect discourse,” because he believed this was more honest and objective than Sallust and Livy, who inserted what they labeled “direct quotations” in their histories but which were really reworded in their own writing styles. See McGing 1986, 106–8.
25. “Only by having agents in Rome or in the provinces, can we explain how [M] was always so well-informed about the political situation” in Rome: Sheldon 2005, 74, and see 75 for an example of his intelligence methods.
26. Cos treasures, Appian 23 and Civil Wars 1.11; Josephus Jewish Antiquities 14.111–13.
27. Monime, Plutarch Lucullus 18; Appian 21 and 48. Reinach 1890, 128, 147, 296.
28. Appian 22. Kallet-Marx 1995, chs 9–11, argues that Rome’s expansionist policies in the East were in reaction to M’s challenges.
29. Appian 21. Diodorus 37.27. Display on a donkey was a traditional ancient ritual of public humiliation.
30. On taxes, Brunt 1971, 39–40. The Greco-Latin word for treasure, gaza, comes from Old Persian, Balsdon 1979, 61. Appian 21.
• 8 •
TERROR
1. Pergamon’s theater seated 10,000, a logical setting for Aquillius’s public execution. See Chaniotis 1997 on M’s theatricality; cf Nero, who often devised punishments and enacted scenes from tragedy, Champlin 2003, 236–37. This execution scene is based on details in Appian 21; Pliny 33.14.48–49; Athenaeus 5.50, Diodorus 37.26–27 confused Aquillius with another Roman who committed suicide, cf Velleius 2.18, Aquillius “should have committed suicide.” Cicero Pro lege Manilia 11 and Tuscan Disputations 5.5, Aquillius beaten. Ballesteros Pastor 2009, 11,
punishment by gold a traditional “Persian ordeal.”
2. Roman avarice, death of Aquillius, and Orodes II’s execution of Crassus in Parthia: Sanford 1950, esp 32–34; Cassius Dio 40.27; cf Plutarch Crassus. Death by molten gold byword for cruelty, eg Cicero Tuscan Disputations 5.14. In 1500s, Europeans claimed that the Aztec king avenged Spanish conquistadors’ lust for gold by M’s means: Theodor De Bry’s painting Great Voyages, 1594, graphically illustrates “death by gold.”
3. Mastrocinque 1999, ch 3, citing Plutarch Pompey 37. Balsdon 1979, 51, 220 and n42; Holland 2003, 42–43.
4. Rigsby 1988, 149–52; Rigsby 1996, 173, 177. Cities allied with M: Reinach 1890, 130; McGing 1986, 109–20.
5. Participation of governing classes and lower classes in massacre, McGing 1986, 116; Arslan 2007, 159–74. See also Introduction. Balsdon 1979, 66–71, 78–79, 170–81, 194–200, with ancient sources including Fronto. Views of Romans, Sanford 1937. Diodorus 37.3. “Mutual suspicion”: Gleason 2006, 241.
6. Balsdon 1979, 73–74, for other massacres of Romans, traders, colonists, and noncombatants in Jugurtha’s Numidia. Sallust Jugurthine War 66–68. Financial crisis in Rome, Kay 2008.
7. Champlin 2003, 236, assumes the sanity of Nero, often portrayed as mad. BekkerNeilsen 2004 citing Gordon Banks, 1990, www.gordonbanks.com/gordon/pubs/kubricks.html.
8. Memnon 22.9; Memnon places massacre after battle for Rhodes. Sheldon 2005, 75–76 and nn. M’s motives, McGing 1986, 115–16; Scullard 1970, 76–77. Mommsen declared that the massacre was a “meaningless act of brutally blind revenge.” Summerer 2009.
9. Ñaco del Hoyo et al. 209, 6–8. Solidarity with Italians, Erciyas 2006, 23. See Arslan 2007 for another Turkish perspective. Kay 2008: massacre and M’s invasion of Anatolia caused massive credit collapse in Rome, described by Cicero in Pro lege Manilia. Chios: Appian 47.
10. Jewish populations in Anatolia: Mitchell 1995, 2:32–37. Ballesteros Pastor 1996, ch 3: Roman soldiers remaining in Anatolia would be an obstacle.
11. McGing 1986, 113. Leo the Emperor, Polyaenus Stratagems 1, in Krentz and Wheeler 1994, 2:1011–15. Sheldon 2003, 85, 60, 63; Sheldon 2005, 74–77. Frontinus Stratagems 13.
12. Athenaeus 5.211–15, based on lost work by Posidonius. Other sources for Athenion and Aristion in Athens: Appian 28, 38. Posidonius FGrH 87 F 36. Strabo 9.1.20. Plutarch Sulla 12–13; Pausanias 1.20. See also Ballesteros Pastor 1996, ch 3; Glew 1977, 255; McGing 1986, 118–21; Mastrocinque 1999, ch 5.
13. Archons inscription, McGing 1986, 119–20. Strabo 9.1.20. Mastrocinque 1999, ch 5, proposes that a Roman soldier with Sulla was the source for Athenion and his successor, Aristion, in 88/87 BC (conflated by later historians).
14. Athenaeus 5.213–15. Ballesteros Pastor 1996, ch 3, fleeing Romans were pro-Sulla partisans.
15. Strabo 13.1.66. Scullard 1970, 77.
16. Appian 24.
17. Demetrius vs Rhodes, Mayor 2009, 212.
18. Following description of battle for Rhodes is based on Appian 24–27; Diodorus 37.28; Memnon 22.8. Hind 1994, 149–50. Sambuca: Polybius 8.4. Reinach 1890, 144–47. See Strauss 2005 for details of naval battles in trireme’s heyday.
19. History, descriptions, and illustrations of siege equipment, Campbell 2006, esp 134–43. Crows, meteor, and Isis hurling fire recorded by Obsequens, Book of Prodigies for the year 88 BC, see Lewis 1976. Notably, Rhodes never removed M’s statue or buildings, Cicero Verr. 2.2.159.
20. Appian 27. Rigsby 1996, 339. Patara, “city in the sand,” is excavated by Akdeniz University, Antalya.
21. Obsequens 56, see Lewis 1976, 126. Aeschylus Agamemnon; Sophocles Iphigenia (fragments); Euripides Iphigenia (two plays). Magi: Herodotus 1.140, 7.114; Pliny 30.3.12. Diodorus 13.102.2, on vows to Furies. Nero, who murdered his mother, was haunted by the Furies; he requested Persian Magi to placate her ghost, Champlin 2003, 91, 98. Human sacrifice in Roman period, see Balsdon 1979, 246–48; Scullard 1970, 48. Surprisingly, there is little discussion of this interrupted sacrifice by modern historians of the Mithradatic Wars. Reinach 1890, 148, puts it in a footnote about “superstition” without commentary; see McGing 1986, 149–50, on the propaganda value of omens.
22. Appian 21, 27. Racy love letters, Plutarch Pompey 37.
23. Strabo 13.4.9.
• 9 •
BATTLE FOR GREECE
1. Events in Rome and Sulla: Keaveney 2005 and Santangelo 2007. Halley’s Comet of 87 BC: Ramsey 2007, 179. Rome’s Eastern foreign policy: Gruen 2004.
2. McGing 1986, 123, points out that the invasion of Greece “was an excellent move”; even if M lost Greece, he had a strong bargaining position.
3. Appian 28. Appian 110; Memnon 22.7; and Pausanias 3.23.2–6 refer to Metrophanes as “Menophanes.” Campaign for Delos and Greece, Hind 1994, 150–59.
4. Greek campaign, Plutarch Sulla; Appian 28–45; Velleius 2.18; Machiavelli Art of War 4.50–52, 4.68. Duggan 1959, 67–82, quote 64. Thebes, Pausanias 1.7. Reinach 1890, ch 3; McGing 1986, 121–27. Matyszak 2008, 59–72.
5. Memnon 22.10–13. First Mithradatic War and Sulla’s troops, Scullard 1970, 76–79.
6. These events: Appian 29; Plutarch Sulla; Duggan 1959, 68.
7. Plutarch Lucullus 37; Justin 38.7; Erciyas 2006, 146–62. Gold, Strabo 15.3.18.
8. This scene was described in Plutarch Sulla 11; Duggan 1959, 69. M’s theatrical gestures, Chaniotis 1997.
9. Preceding events: Valerius Maximus 6.9.6, Plutarch Sulla 1.2–7 and Fortunes of the Romans 318. Appian 28–37. Keaveney 2005. Scullard 1970, 63–87; Balsdon 1979, 168–69.
10. Greek battles remarkably detailed in ancient sources, unlike battles of later Mithradatic Wars. Piraeus: Appian 30–37, 40; Plutarch Sulla. Lightning, Obsequens in Lewis 1976, 127.
11. Alum, Aulus Gellius 15.1. Pliny 35.52.
12. Photos of catapult victim, 2nd century BC, Macedonia: Antikas et al. 2004.
13. Appian 37.
14. Inscribed silver bracelet published by J.-Y. Empereur in Bulletin de Correspondance Hellenique 105 (1981): 566–68, no 7 and fig 48. For photograph and discussion, see Habicht 1998, 15–16, fig 1. Thanks to John Ma for bringing this artifact to my attention.
15. Delphi: Herodotus 1.51. Pausanias 9.7. Diodorus frag 39–39.7. These actions are from Plutarch Sulla 12, 19, and 29 (amulet); Frontinus Stratagems 1.11; Valerius Maximus 1.2.3.
16. Appian 30; Strabo 13.1.54. Lenaeus, captured as a boy in Athens, was later freed by Pompey and accompanied him on campaigns; after 63 BC Lenaeus translated M’s antidote notes (Ch 14). Suetonius Grammarians 15.
17. These events and quotes, Appian 30, 38. Ashes, Pausanias 9.6.2.
18. Plutarch Sulla and Appian 38–39. Pausanias 1.20.
19. Pausanias 1.20.4 and 9.40.4. Habicht 1998, 121–22.
20. Appian 39–40. Sulla forced Aristion to drink poison (probably hemlock). Plutarch Sulla 23. Aristion killed inside the sacred Parthenon, Athena’s temple, Pausanias 1.20.
21. For realistic estimates of the troop numbers at Chaeronea, see Pillonel 2005, who concludes that the number of men mobilized by M in Greece was extremely impressive. According to ancient sources, Sulla received 6,000 reinforcements; Appian 41 says M had 120,000 troops; Memnon 22.13 estimates 60,000. Plutarch Sulla 16.1 says the Romans numbered only 15,000 infantry and 1,500 cavalry, but his source was Sulla himself, who had an interest in claiming that he won with a small army. Sulla came with 30,000 and received another 6,000. See also McGing 1986, 126 n173.
22. Tattoos, Mayor 1999. Camels, Plutarch Lucullus 11.4. Pillonel 2005.
23. Leo the Emperor, Polyaenus Stratagems 1, in Krentz and Wheeler 1994, 2:1011. Sheldon 2005 on sending clandestine messages in the Roman era. A popular pro-M uprising in Chaeronea: Ñaco del Hoyo et al. 2009, 5.
24. Plutarch Sulla; Appian 41–45. Pausanias 9.7. Duggan 1959, 77–78.
25. Camp et al. 1992.
26. Appian 45.
27. Orchomenus: Appian 46, 49–53. Matyszak 2008, 78–81. For estimates of troop numbers at
Orchomenus, see Pillonel 2005. M had promised no taxes for five years in 88 BC.
28. Plutarch Sulla. The battle relics are in the National Museum: thanks to John Ma for this information. Memnon 22.10–13. Camp et al. 1992, 449–50.
29. Gatopoulos 2004; “Stopping Mithridates” 2005. Thanks to Ron Stroud, UC Berkeley.
30. Appian 50. Plutarch Sulla 22. Dorylaus also survived, but his movements were not recorded.
• 10 •
KILLERS’ KISS
1. “Honeymoon,” Reinach 1890, 148. Dorylaus suggested treachery was involved in Archelaus’s devastating losses in Greece, Plutarch Sulla 20. M’s propaganda and strategy in this period, McGing 1986, 121–36. Events in 85–81 BC, Duggan 1959, 82–96.
2. Appian 46. Galatia crucial ally of Rome, Mitchell 1995, 1:31. Galatian rulers, Eder and Renger 2007, 102–5.
3. Plutarch Bravery of Women 23. M consciously replayed scenes from Greek tragedy, Chaniotis 1997. Plutarch Alexander 41, compassion toward lovers. Adobogiona, Strabo 13.4.3; Mitchell 1995, 2:35. Reinach 1890, 297.
4. Athenaeus 6.266, gods were angry with Chios for inventing slavery “while most other nations provided for themselves by their own industry.”
5. Events in Chios and aftermath of Greek defeat, Appian 46–47; Hind 1994, 159–64. Duggan 1959, 79. According to Memnon 23, Dorylaus attacked Chios. Memnon’s native city, Heraclea, allied with Rome, attacked M’s ships and rescued the Chians.
6. M’s theatricality and orchestration of dramatic events, Chaniotis 1997. Whittier, “Mithridates at Chios.” Quotes from Whittier’s note, in War Time, 1864.
7. Plutarch Lucullus 28. Deluxe transport for harems, Casson 1974, 54.
8. A Roman inscription of 86/85 BC found in Ephesus accuses M of “breaking the treaty and gathering his forces [and] attempting to snatch territory he had no claim over.” Mastrocinque 1999, ch 3. Alcaeus of Sardis, Plutarch Pompey 37.
The Poison King Page 48
