Third Mithridatic War
You can help expand this article with text translated from the corresponding article in Italian. (April 2020) Click [show] for important translation instructions.
|
Third Mithridatic War | |
---|---|
Part of the Asia Minor | |
Result | Roman victory |
Territorial changes |
Pontus and Syria become Roman provinces Judea becomes a client state of Rome Armenia becomes an ally of Rome |
Bithynia
Galatia
Cyzicus
Marcus Aurelius Cotta
Pompey
Tigranes II of Armenia
Oroeses of Albania
Artoces of Iberia
Marcus Marius/Varius
The Third Mithridatic War (73–63 BC), the last and longest of the three
Background
In 120 BC, Mithridates V, the king of Pontus was poisoned by unknown figures.[1] The conspirators were probably working for his wife Laodice.[2] In his will Mithridates V left the kingdom to the joint rule of Laodice, Mithridates VI and Mithridates Chrestus. Both of her sons were underage and Laodice retained all power as regent.[3] Laodice in her regency favored her second son (Chrestus was probably more pliable). During her regency 120–116 BC (perhaps even 113 BC), Mithridates VI escaped the court of his mother and went into hiding.[3] He returned between 116 and 113 BC and was able to remove his mother and his brother from the Pontic throne, thus becoming the sole ruler of Pontus.[4]
Mithridates entertained ambitions of making his state the dominant power in the east of Asia Minor and the
The young king then turned his attention to Asia Minor, where Roman power was on the rise. He contrived to partition Paphlagonia and Galatia with King Nicomedes III of Bithynia. Yet it soon became clear to Mithridates that Nicomedes was steering his country into an anti-Pontic alliance with the expanding Roman Republic. When Mithridates fell out with Nicomedes over control of Cappadocia, and defeated him in a series of battles, the latter was constrained to openly enlist the assistance of Rome. The Romans twice interfered in the conflict on behalf of Nicomedes (95–92 BC), leaving Mithridates, should he wish to continue the expansion of his kingdom, with little choice other than to engage in a future Roman-Pontic war. By this time Mithridates had resolved to expel the Romans from Asia.[6]
The next ruler of
The Romans responded by organising a large invasion force (this time sending their own legions) to defeat him and remove him from power. The
Prelude
The period between the Second and Third wars of Rome and the Pontic Kingdom (81–75 BC) is discussed under the
Forces and initial deployments, 74–73 BC
Having launched an attack at the same time as a revolt by
The original plan was that Cotta should tie down Mithridates' fleet, while Lucullus attacked by land. Cotta was therefore ordered to station his fleet at Chalcedon, while Lucullus marched through Phrygia with the intention of invading Pontus. Lucullus had not advanced far when news came through that Mithridates had made a rapid march westward, attacked and defeated Cotta at the Battle of Chalcedon, and forced him to flee behind the walls of Chalcedon. Sixty-four Roman ships had been captured or burnt, and Cotta had lost three thousand men.[12][13] There Cotta was forced to remain until Lucullus could come to his rescue.[14]
Mithridates's defeat in western Asia, 73–72 BC
Having made his way to
Lucullus was camped somewhere along the
But presently, as they were on the point of joining battle, with no apparent change of weather, but all on a sudden, the sky burst asunder, and a huge, flame-like body was seen to fall between the two armies. In shape, it was most like a wine-jar (pithos), and in colour, like molten silver. Both sides were astonished at the sight, and separated. This marvel, as they say, occurred in Phrygia, at a place called Otryae.[18]
No battle occurred. For Marius, delay posed a logistical problem. He had only a few days of supplies for his troops. Lucullus learned of the shortage through prisoner interrogations and decided to wait him out. Marius was forced to move on without the fight he had sought.
The Siege of Cyzicus
While Mithridates was besieging Cyzicus, Lucullus and his army arrived; the Romans, with the help of some turncoats, were able to establish a counter-siege, trapping Mithridates' army on the Cyzicus
Marcus Marius, having survived the Cyzicus campaign, had taken to the sea. Along with Mithridates's admirals Alexandros the Paphlagonian and Dionysios Eunuchos ("the
Like Sertorius himself, Marius at some point had lost an eye; when Lucullus gave the order to track down enemy survivors, he specified that no one-eyed men should be killed, so that he could personally oversee the renegade's death: "Lucullus wished Marius to die under the most shameful insults."[24] Orosius reports that he atoned for his rebellious spirit with penalties he earned.[25]
While Lucullus and Cotta prepared to invade Pontus, Mithridates gained control of the strategically important city of Heraclea Pontica and garrisoned it with 4,000 men.[26] Hearing of the situation at Heraclea, Lucullus and Cotta decided that Cotta would march on Heraclea while Lucullus would move through the Galatian highlands and invade Pontus from there.[27]
Lucullus's invasion and conquest of Pontus 71–69 BC
In 72 BC, while Cotta moved against Heraclea and Triarius managed naval affairs, Lucullus marched his army through Galatia and into Pontus. The Galatians were only too happy to supply the Romans because they detested Mithridates. They were keen to see the Roman legions pass through Galatia without plundering it.[28] Once Lucullus was in the Pontic heartland and he let his troops plunder the rich and fertile area. Mithridates could do nothing to stop the despoiling of his lands for he had to rebuild his army. He eventually assembled 40,000 men (4,000 cavalry) near Cabira and waited for Lucullus.[29]
Themiscyra
Upon entering Pontus, Lucullus lay siege to
Cabira
After careful manoeuvering, Lucullus occupied an old fortress on the heights overlooking Cabira. This was a secure and very defensible position, but its location meant the Romans were cut off from their recent conquests in Pontus and their supply lines now had to come north from Cappadocia, a Roman ally, to the south of Pontus. Since Mithridates dominated the countryside, Lucullus had to send out heavily armed convoys to get supplies. One of those supply convoys, escorted by no less than ten cohorts of infantry (3,000–5,000 men), under the command of the legate Sornatius was attacked by the Pontic cavalry. The Roman infantry stood their ground and held off the attack inflicting terrible losses on the Pontic horsemen. When a second supply convoy, also heavily armed, under the command of the legate Marcus Fabius Hadrianus made for Lucullus's camp Mithridates decided to use a combined arms (infantry and cavalry) attack. A force of 4,000 cavalry and infantry fell upon the convoy, unfortunately for Mithridates, the Romans realized the narrow valley at the scene limited the effectiveness of their opponents' cavalry and they counter-attacked wiping out half the attacking force.[31] With the Romans re-supplied and his attack-force decimated (c. 2000 casualties) Mithridates decided to retreat. During the preparations for the retreat a panic broke out among his troops, Lucullus became aware of what was happening, mustered his army, and attacked Mithridates's camp; at this point the Pontic army broke and disintegrated.[32]
After the Battle of Cabira, Mithridates fled Pontus, he went to Armenia seeking his son-in-law king Tigranes' support. Joined by Lucullus at Nicomedia in 73 BC, Cotta was assigned the task of securing Lucullus' rear by taking Heraclea Pontica, which Mithridates had reinforced with 4,000 troops.[33] After reducing the Pontic coast, Cotta began besieging Heraclea itself, which took him two years to complete, sacking the city in 71 BC.[34] During this time he was forced to dismiss one of his quaestors, Publius Oppius, charging him with bribery and conspiracy.[35] Lucullus himself consolidated Roman control over Pontus. First returning to the siege of Amisus.
Amisus
With Mithridates out of his reach Lucullus set about consolidating his hold on Pontus.
Sinope
After
While Lucullus stayed in the East, Cotta returned to Rome in 70 BC, where he at first was widely acclaimed for his victory at Heraclea.[38] However, around 67 BC he was accused of appropriation of war booty by Gaius Papirius Carbo. He was convicted of the offence and expelled from the Senate.[39]
The First Roman-Armenian War, 69–67 BC
After the
In the spring of 69 BC Lucullus marched his army from Cappadocia across the Euphrates into Greater Armenia (the Armenian Empire's heartland) and the Roman-Armenian War began.[41]
Tigranes sent one of his nobles, Mithrobarzanes, with 2,000–3,000 cavalry to expel the invader. Mithrobarzanes charged the Romans while they were setting up their camp, but was met by a 3,500-strong sentry force and his horsemen were routed. He perished in the attempt.[42]
Battle of Tigranocerta
Lucullus began a siege of the new Armenian imperial capital of Tigranocerta in the Arzenene district. Tigranes, with his main host, returned from mopping up a Seleucid rebellion in Syria, and sought battle with the Romans. Lucullus' army annihilated the Armenian host, despite odds of about more than two to one against him. This was the famous battle of Tigranocerta. It was fought on the same (pre-Julian) calendar date as the Roman disaster at Arausio 36 years earlier, the day before the Nones of October according to the reckoning of the time (or October 6),[43] which is Julian October 16, 69 BC.[44] Tigranes then retired to the northern regions of his kingdom to gather another army and defend his hereditary capital of Artaxata. Meanwhile, Lucullus moved off south-eastwards to the kingdom of the Kurds (Korduene) on the frontiers of the Armenian and Parthian empires. During the winter of 69–68 BC both sides opened negotiations with the Parthian king, Arsaces XVI, who was presently defending himself against a major onslaught from his rival Phraates III coming from Bactria and the far east.[45]
Battle of Artaxata
In the summer of 68 BC Lucullus marched against Tigranes and crossed the Anti-Taurus range heading for the old Armenian capital Artaxata. Once again, Tigranes was provoked to attack, and in a major battle at the Aratsani River, Lucullus defeated the Armenian army. Soon he left this campaign, and when winter came on early in the Armenian tablelands, his troops mutinied, refusing to go further, and he was forced to withdraw southwards back into Arzenene. From there he proceeded back down through Korduene into old
Nisibis
The Armenian garrison at Nisibis was under the command of Tigranes's brother Gouras and the Greek defence expert Callimachus. At first Lucullus besieged the city to no avail; it was strongly fortified, with two walls of brick and a moat. But in the winter of 68/67 BC, during a terrible storm – when the defenders relaxed their guard – Lucullus launched a surprise attack and captured the city and its treasury. It made no difference, Mithridates and Tigranes stuck to their strategy and refused to march against Lucullus; Tigranes was in the process of taking back southern Armenia and Mithridates invaded Pontus.[47]
Mithridates return to Pontus
In the spring of 67 BC, while Lucullus was laying siege to Nisibis, Mithridates suddenly returned to Pontus.[48] The Romans had not expected Mithridates to strike at them in Pontus and he caught several small Roman detachments unaware. The legate Gaius Valerius Triarius who was nearby bringing two legions to reinforce Lucullus took command of all Roman forces in Pontus. After several skirmishes and small battles, a major battle took place on a plain near Zela (the Battle of Zela); the Romans were defeated, leaving 7,000 dead, including 24 tribunes and 150 centurions. As a result, Mithridates was back in control of Pontus.[49]
During the winter of 68–67 BC, at Nisibis, Lucullus's authority over his army was seriously undermined by the efforts of his young brother-in-law Publius Clodius Pulcher, apparently acting in the interests and pay of Pompey the Great, who was eager to succeed Lucullus in the eastern command. Lucullus was able to persuade his army to march back to Asia Minor to protect Roman interests there, but they refused to march against Mithridates. They were tired of constant campaigning for little profit. They threw their purses at Lucullus's feet and accused him that he was the only one making a personal profit of this war and told him to continue it on his own.[50] Since his army refused to campaign against Mithridates, Lucullus withdrew to Galatia leaving Mithridates to consolidate his power and rebuild his army in Pontus. In 66 BC, the Senate sent Pompey (who had been lobbying for the command against Mithridates) to succeed Lucullus. The lull allowed Mithridates and Tigranes to retake part of their respective kingdoms.[citation needed]
Pompey in command
Early in 66 the tribune Gaius Manilius proposed that Pompey should assume supreme command of the war against Mithridates and Tigranes. He should take control from the provincial governors in Asia Minor, have the power to appoint legates himself and the authority to make war and peace and to conclude treaties on his own discretion. The law, the Lex Manilia, was approved by the Senate and the People and Pompey officially took command of the war in the east.[51]
On the approach of Pompey, Mithridates retreated into the centre of his kingdom trying to stretch and cut off the Roman supply lines but this strategy did not work (Pompey excelled at logistics). Eventually Pompey cornered and defeated the king at the river Lycus (see:
In 65 BC, Pompey had set out in pursuit of Mithridates, meeting opposition from the
Complete Roman victory
After his defeat by Pompey in 65 BC, Mithridates VI fled with a small army from Colchis to Crimea and attempted to raise yet another army to take on the Romans but failed to do so. In 63 BC, he withdrew to the citadel in
References
Citations
- ^ Mayor, The Poison King: the life and legend of Mithradates, Rome's deadliest enemy p. 68
- ^ Philip Matyzak, Mithridates the Great, Rome's Indomitable Enemy, p. 6
- ^ a b Mayor, The Poison King: the life and legend of Mithradates, Rome's deadliest enemy p. 69
- ^ Mayor, The Poison King: the life and legend of Mithradates, Rome's deadliest enemy p. 394
- ^ Philip Matyzak, Mithridates the Great, Rome's Indomitable Enemy, pp. 13–18
- ^ Philip Matyzak, Mithridates the Great, Rome's Indomitable Enemy, pp. 19–24
- ^ Philip Matyzak, Mithridates the Great, Rome's Indomitable Enemy, pp. 25–47
- ^ Philip Matyzak, Mithridates the Great, Rome's Indomitable Enemy, pp. 57–100
- ^ Philip Matyzak, Mithridates the Great, Rome's Indomitable Enemy, pp. 101–102
- ^ Anthon, Charles & Smith, William, A New Classical Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography, Mythology and Geography, 1860, p. 226
- ^ Appian, Mithridatica, XI.72; Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 8.
- ^ Holmes, T. Rice, The Roman Republic and the Founder of the Empire, Vol. I, 1923, p. 180
- ^ Appian Mithridates. 71; Plutarch. Lucullus. 8
- ^ T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, Vol II (1952), p. 99
- ^ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great, Rome's indomitable Enemy, pp. 106–113; Plutarch Life of Lucullus, 8.
- ^ Keaveney, Lucullus, p. 77.
- ^ Plutarch, Lucullus 8.
- ^ Plutarch, Life of Lucullus 8.6–7, Loeb Classical Library translation, Bill Thayer's edition at LacusCurtius.
- ^ Lee Fratantuono, Lucullus, p. 60; Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great, p. 112.
- ^ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great, Rome's Indomitable Enemy, pp. 112–113.
- ^ Theodor Mommsen, The History of Rome, vol. 4, p. 329.
- ^ Keaveney, Lucullus, p. 85.
- Orosius6.2.21–22.
- ^ Plutarch, Lucullus 12.5.
- ^ Orosius 6.2.2.
- ^ Lee Fratantuono, Lucullus: the Life and Campaigns of a Roman Conqueror p. 159; Memnon, History of Heraclea, 29.
- ^ Lee Fratantuono, Lucullus: the Life and Campaigns of a Roman Conqueror p. 159.
- ^ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great: Rome's Indomitable Enemy; Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 14.
- ^ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great: Rome's Indomitable Enemy, p. 119; Appian, Mithridatica, 78.
- ^ Fratantuono, Lucullus, p. 64; Appian, Mithridatica, XI.78.
- ^ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great: Rome's Indomitable Enemy p. 121; Lee Fratantuono, Lucullus: the Life and Campaigns of a Roman Conqueror p. 69.
- ^ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great: Rome's Indomitable Enemy pp. 121–122; Lee Fratantuono, Lucullus: the Life and Campaigns of a Roman Conqueror p. 69.
- ^ Holmes, T. Rice, The Roman Republic and the Founder of the Empire, Vol. I, 1923, p. 184
- ^ T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, Vol II (1952), pp. 110, 116 & 122
- ^ T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, Vol II (1952), p. 110
- ^ Lee Fratantuono, Lucullus: The Life and Campaigns of a Roman Conqueror, p. 72; Keaveny, Sulla, the Last Republican, p. 124.
- ^ Lee Fratantuono, Lucullus: the Life and Campaigns of a Roman Conqueror pp. 73–74; Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 13; Orosius, Historiae Adversus Paganos, VI 3.2–3.3.
- ^ T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, Vol II (1952), p. 127
- ^ T. Robert S. Broughton, The Magistrates of the Roman Republic, Vol II (1952), pp. 127 & 144
- ^ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great, pp. 123–125; Lee Frantatuono, Lucullus, p. 77.
- ^ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great, p. 126; Lee Frantatuono, Lucullus, p. 77.
- ^ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great, pp 127–128; Lee Frantatuono, Lucullus, pp 83–84; Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, XII.84.
- ^ Plutarch Camillus 19.11, Lucullus 27.8–9
- ^ See Roman calendar, sub-heading Conversion of pre-Julian dates)
- ^ Plutarch, Lucullus, 30.
- ^ Lee Fratantuono, Lucullus, the Life and Campaigns of a Roman Conqueror, pp. 101–104.
- ^ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great, Rome's Indomitable Enemy, p. 139; Lee Fratantuono, Lucullus, the Life and Campaigns of a Roman Conqueror, pp. 104–105; Eutropius, Breviarium, 6.9.1.
- ^ Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great, Rome's Indomitable Enemy, p. 140.
- ^ Lee Fratantuono, Lucullus, the Life and Campaigns of a Roman Conqueror, p. 108; Philip Matyszak, Mithridates the Great, Rome's Indomitable Enemy, pp. 140–142; Mayor, p. 311; Appian, Mithridatica, 89; Cassius Dio, Roman History, 36.12.
- ^ Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 35.
- ^ John Leach, Pompey the Great, p. 75; Cicero, Cassius Dio, Roman History, 36.43.2.
- ^ A History of Rome, LeGlay, et al. 100
- ^ Hojte, Jakob Munk. "The Death and Burial of Mithridates VI". Retrieved 3 February 2015.
Ancient sources
- FHG = Karl Müller (ed.) Fragmenta Historicorum Graecorum
- FGrH = Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker(commenced 1923)
- Memnon of Herakleia Pontike, 9th century epitome in the ΒΙΒΛΙΟΘΗΚΗ of Photius of Byzantium (codex 224)
- ed. René Henry Photius Bibliotheque Tome IV: Codices 223–229 (Association Guillaume Budé, Paris, 1965), pp. 48–99: Greek text with French translation
- ed. K. Müller FHG III, 525: Greek text with Latin translation
- ed. F. Jacoby FGrH no. 434: Greek text, detailed commentary in German
- Phlegon of Tralles fragmenta
- ed. K. Müller FHG III, 602ff.
- ed. F. Jacoby FGrH no. 257
- English translations and commentary by William Hansen, Phlegon of Tralles' Book of Marvels (University of Exeter Press, 1996)
Modern works
Abbreviations
RE = Real-Encyclopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, eds. Pauly, Wissowa, Kroll
Major studies
- Eckhardt, Kurt. "Die armenischen Feldzüge des Lukullus",
- I. Introduction. Klio, 9 (1909), 400–412
- II. Das Kriegsjahr 69. Klio, 10 (1910), 72–115
- III. Das Kriegsjahr 68. Klio, 10 (1910), 192–231
- Holmes, T. Rice: The Roman Republic and the Founder of the Empire, vol.I (1923), 398–436
- Gelzer, Matthias: "L. Licinius Lucullus cos.74", RE vol.XIII (1926), s. v. Licinius (104), colls. 376–414.
- Magie, David: Roman Rule in Asia Minor, to the End of the Third Century after Christ 2 vols. (Princeton University Press, 1950)
- Van Ooteghem, J: Lucius Licinius Lucullus, (Brussels, 1959)
- Keaveney, Arthur: Lucullus. A Life. (London/New York: Routledge, 1992). ISBN 0415032199.
Shorter articles
- Anderson, J G C: "Pompey's Campaign against Mithradates", JRS 12 (1922), 99ff.
- Downey, Glanville: "Q. Marcius Rex at Antioch", Classical Philology 32 (1937), 144–151
- Bennett, William H: "The Death of Sertorius and the Coin", Historia, 10 (1961), 459–472
- McGing, B C: "The Date of the outbreak of the Third Mithridatic War", Phoenix, 38 (1984), 12–18
- Williams, Richard S: "The Appointment of Glabrio (COS.67) to the Eastern Command", Phoenix 38 (1984), 221–234
- Tatum, W J: "Lucullus and Clodius at Nisibis (Plutarch, Lucullus 33–34)", Athenaeum, 79 (1991)
Further reading
- Burcu Erciyas, Deniz. 2005. Wealth, aristocracy and royal propaganda under the Hellenistic kingdom of the Mithridatids in the central Black Sea region of Turkey. Leiden: Brill.
- Gabrielsen, Vincent, and John Lund, eds. 2007. The Black Sea in Antiquity: Regional and interregional economic exchanges. Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press.
- McGing, Brian C. 1986. The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator king of Pontos. Leiden: Brill.
- Sherwin-White, Adrian N. 1984. Roman foreign policy in the East 168 B.C. to A.D. 1. London: Duckworth.
- Sullivan, Richard D. 1990. Near Eastern royalty and Rome: 100–30 B.C. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.