Chapter 1
1. Bosworth, Wheatley, ‘The Origins of the Pontic House’, in The Journal of Hellenic Studies, vol 118 (1998), pp 155-164.
2. Diodorus Siculus, 20.111.4.
3. Plutarch, Life of Demetrius, 4.
4. Polybios, Histories, 5.43
5. Strabo, Geography, 12.3.11
6. This theory (still controversial) is mentioned in Francois Hinard, Sylla (Paris, 1985), pp 21-22 and discussed by John A Madden & Arthur Keaveney in ‘Sulla Père and Mithridates (Notes and Discussions)’, in Classical Philology, vol 88, No 2 (1993), pp 138-141.
7. Pliny, Natural History, 23.149 and Celsus, De Medicina, 5.23.3; cf ‘Mithridates’ Antidote - A Pharmacological Ghost’, in Early Science and Medicine, Issue Volume 9, Number 1 (2004).
8. Justin, Epitome, 37.1.2.
9. Ibid, 38.4.7.
10. Strabo, 12.3.32; cf Deniz Burcu Erciyas, ‘Comana Pontica: A City or a Sanctuary?’, widen in The Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Black Sea Studies, University of Aarhus.
Chapter 2
1. Eva Matthews, ‘Roman Avarice in Asia’, in Sanford Journal of Near Eastern Studies (1950), gives a detailed account of Roman financial activity with regard to Asia and Pontus in this period.
2. Eutropius, Epitome, 4.5.
3. Cf. Saprykin Sergey, ‘The Policy of Mithridates Eupator and the North Coast of the Black Sea’, in Danish National Research Foundation’s Centre for Black Sea Studies, University of Aarhus.
4. Strabo, Geography, 7.4.3.
5. Justin, Epitome, 37.3.4ff.
6. Ibid, 38.1.1ff.
7. Strabo, Geography, 12.5.2.
8. Diodorus Siculus, 36.15.1.
9. Justin, Epitome, 38.1; Memnon, FgrH434 (22).
10. Plutarch, Life of Marius, 31.
11. Justin, Epitome, 38.3.1-4.
Chapter 3
1. Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 5.
2. Cf. Brian C McGing, The Foreign Policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus (Leiden, 1986), pp 84-85 for references to many of these.
3. An overview of Roman policy to date is to be found in A N Sherwin-White, ‘Roman Involvement in Anatolia, 167-88 B.C.’, in The Journal of Roman Studies, (1977).
4. Appian, Mithridatica, 3.17, is clear that at this point Aquillius was not following orders from the senate but making up policy as he went along. We should also note that later Roman historiography was probably influenced by the anti-Marian, and therefore anti-Aquillius, historian Rutilius Rufus, who was living in Asia at that time.
5. Ibid, 2.14.
6. Dio, fr 97.2, is certainly wrong to state the Mithridates was dealing directly with the senate at this time. Cf Cicero, pro Flacco, 98, for Aquillius’ greed.
7. Troop numbers are largely based on Appian, Mithridatica, 3.17.
8. Ibid, 3.18.
9. J Munro, ‘Roads in Pontus, Royal and Roman’, in The Journal of Hellenic Studies, (1901), remains one of the best sources for the contemporary geography.
10. Kenan T Erim and Joyce Reynolds, Aphrodisias and Rome: Documents from the Excavation of the Theatre at Aphrodisias Conducted by Professor Kenan T. Erim, together with Some Related Texts by Joyce Reynolds, published by the Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies (London, 1982).
11. R K Sherk, Roman Documents from the Greek East (RDGE), 260, no 48.
12. Pliny, Natural History, 33.14.
Chapter 4
1. Appian, Mithridatica, 22.
2. The exact date of the deed is uncertain. The best guide is Cicero, De imp. Pomp, 7, which says it was twenty-three years before 66 BC, so early 88 BC or thereabouts, at the time when Mithridates was awaiting the Roman onslaught which never came.
3. Appian, Mithridatica, 23ff, for the gory details.
4. Ibid, 25.
5. This siege merits almost a small bibliography of its own, of which the most informative and entertaining works are: L Sprague de Camp, ‘Master Gunner Apollonios’ , in Technology and Culture, (1961); William Ledyard Rodgers, Greek and Roman Naval Warfare (Annapolis, 1984); and Duncan B Campbell, Ancient Siege Warfare (Oxford, 2005).
6. Sporting tries at disentangling Athenian politics of the period include: Glenn Richard Bugh, ‘Athenion and Aristion of Athens’, in Phoenix, (1992); and Sterling Dow, ‘A Leader of the Anti-Roman Party in Athens in 88 B.C’, in Classical Philology, (1942).
7. Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 10ff, for details of this early campaign
Chapter 5
1. Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 11.
2. Ibid, 2.
3. Appian, Mithridatica, 38.
4. Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 14.
5. What follows is largely a synthesis of the accounts of Appian, Plutarch and others, though precedence has been given to Plutarch as Charonea was, after all, his home town and he had merely to take an afternoon stroll to see the battleground for himself.
6. W. Kendrick Pritchett, ‘Observations on Chaironeia’, in American Journal of Archaeology, Volume 62, No 3 (July, 1958), pp 307-311, is mainly interested in the earlier battle of 338 but still has some useful observations on topology.
7. Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 18. It was thanks to the downhill slope that Roman light artillery was able to participate in the battle - an unusual occurrence on ancient battlefields.
Chapter 6
1. Appian, Mithridatica, 47.
2. Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 21.
3. Memnon, 33.
4. Frontinus, Strategems, 2.3.17.
5. See E Badian, ‘Waiting for Sulla’, in The Journal of Roman Studies, (1962), for the situation in Italy at this time
6. Cf: J Madden and A Keaveney, ‘Sulla Pere and Mithridates’, in Classical Philology, Vol 88, No 2 (1993).
7. Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 3.
Chapter 7
1. Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 22.9, says Pontus had to pay 2,000 talents as well. Memnon, 35.2, puts the figure at 3,000 talents.
2. Modern discussions of this settlement are surprisingly rare. Perhaps the best is Sherwin-White, Roman Foreign Policy in the East, 168 BC to AD 1 (Norman, Oklahoma, 1983), pp143-149.
3. For a full treatment of what this term entailed, see ‘Rex Socius to Rex Datus’, in Maurice Sartre, The Middle East under Rome (Cambridge, Massachusetts, 2005), pp 71-90.
4. Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 7.
5. Memnon, 26.3. Information for the period between the first and third Mithridatic wars is scanty and often contradictory. The description of this campaign is a synthesis drawn largely from the work of Plutarch, Appian and Memnon.
6. Appian, Mithridatica, 65.
7. Ibid, 66.
8. Suetonius, The Life of Caesar, 2.
9. Tigranes is another character whose life has been sadly under-chronicled. The most comprehensive modern work, Herant K Armen, Tigranes the Great (Detroit, 1940), is a somewhat flawed and haphazard text.
10. No-one is quite sure exactly where. Cf: T Rice Holmes, ‘Tigranocerta’, in The Journal of Roman Studies (1917).
11. Figures, as ever, courtesy of Appian, Mithridatica, 70.
Chapter 8
1. Justin, 38.4-7. Justin explicitly states he is passing on the speech unaltered as he received it from Trogus, a historian contemporary with Mithridates.
2. As Vellius Paterculus adds, Mithridates was the last king in the region, apart from that of the Parthians, who was totally independent of Rome. Vellius Paterculus, 2.40.1.
3. For a fuller discussion of this complex question, see B C McGing, ‘The Date of the Outbreak of the Third Mithridatic War’, in Phoenix, Volume 38, No 1 (1984), pp 12-18.
4. Memnon, 37.
5. Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 8.
6. Appian, Mithridatica, 69. Strabo, 12.8.11, puts the numbers at 150,000.
7. Cicero, in Pro Murena, 33, calls Cyzicus the key to Asia: ‘eamque urbem sibi Mithridates Asiae ianuam fore putasset qua effracta et revolsa tota pateret provincial.
8. The description of Cyzicus in antiquity is drawn from Robert de Rustafjaell, ‘Cyzicus’, in The Journal of Hellenic Studies (1902).
9. The siege is mainly from Appian, Mithridatica, 74, with Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 9-12.
10. Eutropius, 6.6.
11. Assuming these are the 100 described in Florus 3.5.18.
Chapter 9
1. Much of the geography of military action in Pontus is based on the work of J Munro over a century ago: J Munro, ‘Roads in Pontus, Royal and Roman’, in Journal of Hellenic Studies (1901).
2. Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 14.
3. Appian, Mithridatica, 78.
4. Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 15; Appian, Mithridatica, 79, gives the same story, but dates the event later, probably in 71 BC.
5. Memnon, 45.
6. Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 15.
7. Two articles which make valuable reading in conjunction with this account are: C Konrad, ‘Reges Armenii Patricios Resalutare Non Solent?’, in The American Journal of Philology (1983); and a sceptical reading of Plutarch and Appian by D Mulroy, ‘The Early Career of P. Clodius Pulcher: A Re-Examination of the Charges of Mutiny and Sacrilege’, in Transactions of the American Philological Association (1974-1988), which is also sympathetic toward the Fimbrian legions.
8. Cicero, in his speech On the Command of Pompey, 23, shows this was indeed the reaction in Rome.
9. Strabo, 12.2.1.
10. Appian, Mithridatica, 85.
11. Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 26.
12. Phlegon, fr12.
13. Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 27, is the main source for this reconstruction, with help from Appian, Mithridatica, 85; Frontinus, Strategems, 2.1.14; and Memnon, 57M. Valuable geographical detail is to be found in T Rice Holmes, ‘Tigranocerta’, in The Journal of Roman Studies, 1917.
Chapter 10
1. Sallust, Letter of Mithridates, 1.1.
2. Ibid, 20.
3. Appian, Mithridatica, 87. Most modern historians agree this figure is too high for the population available, and is in any case not borne out by the kings’ conduct in the subsequent campaign.
4. Dio, 36.5.
5. Alternatively spelled ‘Mush’, in the Taron region of modern Armenia.
6. Appian, Mithridatica, 89. Further help on reconstructing the battle is found in Dio, 36.12.
7. Plutarch, Life of Lucullus, 35.
8. Cicero, On the command of Pompey, 3; cf W Loader, ‘Pompey’s Command under the Lex Gabinia’, in The Classical Review (1940) for discussion of what this command entailed.
9. Plutarch, Life of Crassus, 9.
10. Cicero, On the command of Pompey, 12.
11. Plutarch, Life of Pompey, 31.
12. Army numbers based on the work of Sherwin-White (1983) and Cambridge Ancient History (1951)
13. Plutarch, Life of Pompey, 32.
14. The main sources for this reconstruction of events are Appian, Mithridatica, 100; Plutarch, Life of Pompey, 32; Cassius Dio, 36.48; and Livy, Epitome, 101, with geographical assistance from Strabo, 12.3.28.
Chapter 11
1. Plutarch, Life of Pompey, 32.
2. Cassius Dio, 36.50.
3. For details of this and other Pompeian foundations in Pontus see W Fletcher, ‘The Pontic Cities of Pompey the Great’, in Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association, volume 70 (1939).
4. Strabo, 11.13.1.
5. J Thorley, ‘The Development of Trade between the Roman Empire and the East under Augustus’, in Greece & Rome (1969), p.215.
6. Site of the modern city of Kertsch.
7. Cicero, Pro Murena, 30-33.
8. Appian, Mithridatica, 107.
9. Ibid, 109.
10. Florus, 1.40.25; Strabo, 7.5.1.
11. Appian, Mithridatica, 109.
12. Ibid, 110.
13. Ibid
14. The last hours of Mithridates are recorded in Appian, Mithridatica, 111, and Cassius Dio, 38.12-14.
Chapter 12
1. J C G Anderson, ‘Pontica’, in The Journal of Hellenic Studies, volume 20 (1900), pp 151-158; A J Marshall, ‘Pompey’s Organization of Bithynia-Pontus: Two Neglected Texts’, in The Journal of Roman Studies, volume 58, parts 1 and 2 (1968).
2. Adrian Goldsworthy, Caesar: Life of a Colossus (London, 2006) pp 446-447.