The First Mithridatic War (89–85 BC) was a large conflict in Anatolia and ancient Greece in opposition to the Roman Republic by the Pontic kingdom ruled by Mithridates VI Eupator. Although the Roman general Sulla was largely victorious on the battlefield, factional struggle in Rome forced him to end the war on a precarious stalemate.
The war began after more than a decade of geopolitical manoeuvring by Mithridates, who managed to considerably extend his realm despite constant Roman attempts to restrain him. In 90 BC, a Roman delegation headed by Manius Aquillius provoked Mithridates into war, as Aquillius hoped to receive its command. The following year, Mithridates rapidly captured the Roman province of Asia, exploiting local resentment of Roman tax collectors to massacre the Roman settlers. Taken by surprise while it was fighting a large revolt of its allies in Italy, Rome was initially unable to respond. This allowed Mithridates to encourage more defections from Greek cities, most notably Athens, where he installed the tyrant Aristion.
In Rome, the attribution of the command of the Mithridatic War led to civil strife, which was won by Sulla after he made a coup by marching his army on the city in 88 BC. However, once Sulla left Italy, his enemies Marius and Cinna seized power and declared him a public enemy. As a result, Sulla waged the war on his own as a rogue general. His campaign was swift: in 86 BC, he took Athens, then crushed Mithridates' general Archelaus in central Greece at the battles of Chaeronea and Orchomenos. Meanwhile, the official Roman government dispatched its own army to fight Mithridates, led by Lucius Valerius Flaccus, who was murdered by his lieutenant Fimbria. The latter then crossed into Asia and successfully conducted his own campaign against Mithridates.
At this point, Sulla realised that Fimbria could rob him of his victory, so he offered a generous peace to Mithridates called the treaty of Dardanos, restoring the situation to its pre-89 BC state. Soon after, Sulla convinced Fimbria's soldiers to defect and forced him to commit suicide, thus removing the last threat to his private empire in the East. In 83 BC, Sulla left Greece to fight the Cinno-Marians, against whom he won a civil war, which enabled his rule as dictator in Rome. However, Sulla's settlement of the East was short-lived; hostilities rapidly resumed in the Second Mithridatic War (83–81 BC), fought on the Roman side by Murena, the lieutenant that Sulla had left behind in Asia.
Sources No contemporary account of Mithridates has survived. Modern historians have to use fragmentary or summarised versions of lost works, or histories written much later, none favourable to Mithridates.Adler, "Who's Anti-Roman? Sallust and Pompeius Trogus on Mithridates", p. 390, writes "we do not possess any of the numerical historical sources that were sympathetic to Mithridates".Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, p. 97. The most important source is the Roman history of Appian of Alexandria, a Greek author of the 2nd century AD, who is nevertheless not a good historian, prone to mistakes.Sherwin-White, Roman Foreign Policy, pp. 4, 5, "an author sadly deficient in precise chronology".McGind, "Mithridates VI, Victim or Agressor", in Hojte (ed.), Mithridates VI, p. 81.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, pp. 98, 99.
Another significant source is Plutarch, who wrote in the early 2nd century AD a set of famous biographies known as the Parallel Lives, which includes the lives of Roman commanders who played a role during the wars against Mithridates, most importantly Sulla, and also Marius, Lucullus, Sertorius, and Pompey.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, p. 98. Plutarch provides excellent descriptions of Sulla's campaign in central Greece, as he was born in Chaeronea, where a major battle took place.Hind, Mithridates, p. 154. The Greek geographer Strabo was born in Pontus in the 1st century and his family even served at the royal court, but his historical works are lost; he still often mentions Mithridates in his Geographica.Kuin, "Rewriting Family History: Strabo and the Mithridatic Wars", p. 109. Other important mentions are also found in the letters and speeches of Cicero, a contemporary of the events.Sherwin-White, Roman Foreign Policy, pp. 5,6.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, pp. 97, 98. The fragments of the Greek philosopher Posidonius are useful for the history of Athens during this period.Habicht, Athens, p. 300 (note 7). Finally, some scraps of information can be retrieved from the later works of Justin, Frontinus, and the De viris illustribus.Hind, Mithridates, p. 130.Sherwin-White, Roman Foreign Policy, p. 5.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, pp. 97, 99.
The major problem with most of these written sources is that they often derive from the lost Memoirs of Sulla—a key player of these events—who considerably arranged the facts to suit his propaganda, both against Mithridates and his rivals in Rome.Badian, "Waiting for Sulla", p. 50.Cornell, Fragments, vol. I, p. 286.Lovano, The Age of Cinna, p. 143. He typically defamed his enemies, such as Fimbria, who is described in very unfavourable terms in all the sources, as they follow Sulla.Mulroy, "Early Career of P. Clodius", p. 159.
The Greek historian Memnon wrote a history of his city Heraclea Pontica (near modern Zonguldak in Turkey), where some action took place, which is likewise only available in fragments, but they show that Memnon did not use Roman sources and recounted events of the war differently from Appian.Lovano, The Age of Cinna, p. 159 (note 66).
Numismatics is another important source for the period, since Mithridates' coinage was extensive throughout his empire,McGind, "Foreign Policy", pp. 93-99. as well as epigraphy, with many cities of the area inscribed treaties and statutes on stone.Sherwin-White, Roman Foreign Policy, pp. 6, 7. However, archaeology of northern Turkey has been poor apart from the excavations of the royal tombs in Amaseia.Robert Fleischer, "The Rock-tombs of the Pontic Kings in Amaseia (Amasya)", in Hojte (ed.), Mithridates VI, pp. 109-119. Mithridates also left monuments and inscriptions, such as the heroon he dedicated in Delos.McGind, "Foreign Policy", p. 90. Many statues and bust have been ascribed to him, but their attribution is often disputed among modern scholars; only one head is unanimously recognised as his, which is now in the Louvre Museum.McGind, "Foreign Policy", p. 100.
Origins of the war Pontic expansion
Rome entered for good in Asia Minor in 133, when the last king of Pergamon, Attalus III, bequeathed his kingdom to the Republic. The province of Asia was created in its place in 129, which put the Roman borders close to several kingdoms located in the area.Sherwin-White, Roman Foreign Policy, pp. 80–92. The largest of those was that of Pontus, ruled by the Mithridatids, a dynasty of Persian origin, claiming descent from Darius the Great.McGind, "Foreign Policy", p. 10.Hind, Mithridates, pp. 129, 130. Their control of the Greek city-states of the northern coast of Anatolia added a significant Hellenistic touch to the kingdom.McGind, "Foreign Policy", p. 11.
Mithridates VI Eupator became king c. 120 at 13.McGind, "Foreign Policy", p. 43.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, p. 97. At his majority, he started an expansionist policy towards the coast of the Black Sea and the interior of Asia minor. In 107 he obtained Lesser Armenia and Colchis, an area rich in timber used for building ships, but the details of these acquisitions are unknown.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, pp. 111, 112. He provided military assistance against the Scythians to the Greek cities of the Black Sea, such as Apollonia Pontica, Olbia, Odessus, and Tyras, which made alliances with him. After he was bequeathed the Bosporan Kingdom (in modern Crimea), Mithridates controlled all the eastern shore of the Black Sea by the end of the 2nd century.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, pp. 113-117. Mithridates also expanded into Asia Minor, thanks to his alliance with Nicomedes III of Bithynia. The two kings first invaded Paphlagonia in 108–107 and shared the land between them.McGind, "Foreign Policy", pp. 66-69.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, pp. 119, 120. The same year, Mithridates occupied a part of Galatia, the area in central Anatolia populated by three Celtic tribes.McGind, "Foreign Policy", pp. 70-72).Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, p. 121. He also murdered the king of Cappadocia c.100 and placed his son on its throne,McGind, "Foreign Policy", p. 75. but this time Rome reacted and forced Mithridates and Nicomedes III to release Paphlagonia and Cappadocia, on which throne Ariobarzanes was placed.McGind, "Foreign Policy", p. 77.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, pp. 122-124.
After this setback, Mithridates turned to his eastern neighbour Armenia, where a new king ascended to the throne in 95: Tigranes II, to whom he gave his daughter Cleopatra in marriage.McGind, "Foreign Policy", p. 78.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, pp. 125, 126. In exchange, in 92, Tigranes II invaded Cappadocia, expelled Ariobarzanes, and gave the land to Mithridates. This new aggression prompted Rome to intervene again; as propraetor, Lucius Cornelius Sulla was sent there and engaged Cappadocian troops led by the Pontic general Archelaus.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, p. 127. At the same time, Mithridates took possession of Bithynia by expelling his nephew Nicomedes IV—the son of his former ally—, then removed Ariobarzanes from Cappadocia a second time after Sulla had left.McGind, "Foreign Policy", p. 79.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, pp. 128, 129. The Social War that had started between Rome and its former Italian allies in 91 emboldened Mithridates to conquer his neighbours, defying Roman orders.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, p. 129.
Aquillius' embassy (90–89 BC) At the end of 90, after hearing the complaints of the kings in exile Ariobarzanes and Nicomedes IV, the senate sent a new embassy, headed by Manius Aquillius, a former consul, the son of the homonymous consul of 129 that had won the war against Aristonicus.Magie, Roman Rule, p. 208.Sherwin-White, Roman Foreign Policy, p. 112.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, p. 132. Aquillius and Manlius Mancinus, another ambassador, were notably Gaius Marius' friends.Luce, "Marius", pp. 187, 190. After having restored the two kings without a fight, the embassy requested that they attack Pontus; deep in debts with Rome, Nicomedes complied and ravaged Pontus up to Amastris to recover his wealth.Hind, Mithridates, p. 144.Magie, Roman Rule, pp. 208, 209. Mithridates did not oppose him, but still started recruiting soldiers from the Black Sea area. The king wanted to gain time and sent his ambassador Pelopidas to last chance negotiations with Aquillius in Pergamon, which took place in the spring of 89.Luce, "Marius", p. 186.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, p. 132. These negotiations were marred with sophistry and spurious agreements; Mithridates listed his claims over Cappadocia and Bithynia and presented himself as a victim of Nicomedes' pillage, while the latter detailed how Mithridates breached the treaties and prepared for war.McGind, "Foreign Policy", p. 80. In a second meeting several weeks later, as Aquillius had already sided with Nicomedes, Pelopidas accused him of acting for his own benefit and threatened to go directly before the senate, which angered the commissioners and ended the talks, making war inevitable.Roller, Empire of the Black Sea, pp. 132–135.