APPENDIX ONE 
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).
13. Acknowledged as king. Mithradates was hailed as king of Pontus, called “King of Kings.”
14. Rules peacefully for a time. The first decade of Mithradates’ reign was peaceful.
15. Prescribes new laws, promotes a new world order. Mithradates established new laws (freeing slaves, canceling debt, expanding citizenship) and promoted a “new world order”: his alternative to Roman rule in his new Black Sea Empire.
16. Later loses favor with gods and/or subjects. During the wars against Rome, omens indicated gods’ disfavor; heavy losses caused allies to abandon Mithradates. His subjects turned against his increasingly draconian rule; he was beset by defections, desertions, betrayals. In the end, he lost his power in a revolt.
17. Driven from throne and city. Lucullus and Pompey both drove Mithradates from his throne in Pergamon and Pontus, forcing him to abandon his kingdom and flee for his life, first to Armenia, and then to his Kingdom of the Bosporus in the Crimea. His son Pharnaces revolted, driving Mithradates from his throne.
18. Unusual or mysterious death. The circumstances of Mithradates’ death were extraordinary, mysterious, and violent. Barricaded in a tower, he attempted to commit suicide with poison. He died by the sword of his bodyguard; some sources say he was killed by his son’s soldiers. His body was never indentified with certainty; his death was not “simple” but in effect “double” (Cassius Dio 37.13).
19. Dies in an elevated place. Mithradates died in the high tower of his fortress, on Mount Mithradates, above the town of Pantikapaion.
20. Children do not succeed him. Mithradates himself ensured that his sons could not succeed him, murdering or getting rid of all but one viable heir, Pharnaces, who betrayed him to the Romans and usurped the crown. Pharnaces did not independently inherit Mithradates’ original Kingdom of Pontus; his status was that of a client of Rome. Crushed by Julius Caesar, Pharnaces died in 47 BC.
21. Corpse buried unconventionally, or somehow hidden or obscured.Mithradates’ corpse was poorly embalmed and shipped across the Black Sea to Pompey. The face was unrecognizable, raising doubts that he was really dead. Even though Pompey could not be certain it was Mithradates’ body, he gave it a grand burial, yet the location is unclear.
22. More than one revered tomb. Pompey placed the body in Mithradates’ family tomb. But the sources conflict, and scholars still debate whether Mithradates’ body was interred in Sinope or in Amasis.
23. Prophecies predicted future greatness. Numerous prophecies and oracles predicted Mithradates’ birth, his rise to power, and his grand destiny.
PERSONALITY DISORDERS
Does Mithradates fit the typical personality profile of “the poisoner”? In Rome and Greece, poison was considered the weapon of women and “unmanly” Persian-influenced barbarians; today it is often seen as the weapon of the greedy, weak, oppressed, or cowardly (Stuart 2004, 114–15), or the murder method of psychopaths, “controlling, sneaky people with no conscience” or remorse. Some call the poisoners of family members “custodial killers” (Newman 2005, 18–19). Perhaps this label best fits Mithradates as poisoner of his harem, since he felt he was protecting his family and acting as guardian of his and their honor. In other cases, however, Mithradates mastered what was the traditional weapon of succession and assassination in his world.
Is it possible or useful to apply current psychiatric diagnostic tools to historical figures, based on reported behavior and character? In the case of Mithradates, the temptation is great. Among the many drawbacks is the fact that all the evidence was presented by his enemies. Yet “the question deserves to be asked,” declares Danish historian Tønnes Bekker-Neilsen, who initiated the analysis of Mithradates’ mental health in 2004. The king’s known activities, “crimes,” emotions, and contradictions have been thoroughly detailed in the preceding chapters. Based on the available evidence of Mithradates’ psychiatric history, what might be measured by modern diagnostic rating scales for personality disorders?
In modern psychiatry, psychopaths are usually highly intelligent, superficially charming individuals who do not experience deep emotions or empathy and habitually lie and manipulate others. Some, but not all, psychopaths are violent criminals. Other conditions are often confused with psychopathy. For example, a “borderline personality” suffers severe mood swings, fragile emotional defenses, and fluctuating self-image, among other traits (Bekker-Neilsen equates borderline personality with psychopathy). Antisocial personality disorder is applied to those who commit aggressive, criminal acts. Mithradates could be considered a sociopath: someone who may commit crimes but has a strong sense of right and wrong based on the values of his or her particular social group.
The standard Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R), devised and refined by psychologist Robert Hare in the 1980s, has twenty traits. The highest possible score is 40; the score of the general population falls under 5. The following list condenses the traits into fourteen characteristics and considers whether or not they apply to Mithradates, as he was known to his contemporaries and ancient historians.
1. Superficial, glib charm, intelligent, articulate. Mithradates was a highly intelligent, charismatic leader and a brilliant, persuasive orator. Yet by all reports, his appeal was not superficial but reflected a genuinely likable personality and deeply held principles.
2. Grandiose sense of self-worth, narcissism. Mithradates had a penchant for theatrical gestures and a grandiose sense of self-worth. But these traits could be seen as an occupational hazard for an ambitious, popular Hellenistic monarch with a dazzling family tree, revered as divine and surrounded by prophecies of grandeur. Unlike his friend King Tigranes, Mithradates was flexible and realistic, responsive to adversity, and able to function as an ordinary individual, and as an equal of his soldiers when necessary.
3. Early behavior problems.Boyhood experiments with poisons and running away from home were rational reactions to Mithradates’ dysfunctional family situation and genuine plots on his life by his mother and guardians.
4. Lack of conscience, lack of guilt or remorse. Documented incidents indicate that Mithradates did not lack a conscience. He had a strong sense of right and wrong and suffered guilt and remorse, which in some cases led him to pardon those who wronged him.
5. Lack of empathy, callousness, cold-blooded violence. As a leader determined to wipe out enemy Romans in Anatolia, Mithradates certainly exhibited extreme ruthlessness in 88 BC and callous, cold-blooded behavior in other instances. Some of his murderous acts were policy decisions under duress; others were planned revenge. Yet, as noted above, several episodes show that Mithradates was also capable of compassion and forgiveness, even against his own interest.
6. Manipulative, deceitful, habitual lying.Mithradates could manipulate and intimidate others, an asset in diplomacy and politics. As one educated to respect Truth as opposed to Deceit, he was generally honest; he did not have a reputation as a liar, even among his enemies. He was a master of deception in warfare, a positive attribute in his day.
7. Refusal to accept responsibility for actions, unreliable. Although during bouts of paranoia Mithradates was quick to suspect treachery and blame others, this was often a rational response to real threats. In general, he prized loyalty and was a reliable friend and ally; he took responsibility for his own decisions, an important tenet of his Persian upbringing.
8. Promiscuous sexual behavior.Mithradates was sexually vigorous, with numerous partners, fathering many children. But harems and multiple offspring were the norm for Macedonian-Persian royalty in the Hellenistic era. He was not reputed to be sexually dissolute, as some contemporaries were.
9. Parasitic, dependent lifestyle. Mithradates was wealthy but generous. He was never lazy or parasitic, but was universally admired as extremely hardworking and resourceful.
10. Impulsive behavior, easily bored, requires stimulation. Remarkably intelligent and creative, Mithradates probably required constant stimulation; his interests were wide-ranging, from botany, toxicology, gemology and art, literature, and music to engineering technology and furniture making. There is evidence for violence and a hot temper, but Mithradates was usually shrewd and calculating, capable of great patience and restraint. He was also a defiant and daring risk-taker, once again an asset in his day.
11. Incapable of realistic, long-term planning. Mithradates’ reign was distinguished by long-term planning, which he and others deemed realistic. He was quick to revise strategies to meet new challenges. As Bekker-Neilsen points out, Mithradates did have a tendency to underestimate obstacles and adversaries, but this is a common trait among successful leaders in any era.
12. Shallow emotions, fearlessness, lack of anxiety or depression. Mithradates was courageous but not without fear. He experienced strong negative and positive emotions: love, hate, compassion, humor, generosity, revenge, anxiety, fear, grief, loyalty, and depression.
13. Lack of appreciation for art and music. By all reports, Mithradates had a passionate appreciation for art, literature, theater, and music.
14. Failure to form long-term relationships and loyalties, many short-term relationships.Mithradates faced “difficulty in creating durable alliances,” remarked Bekker-Neilsen, “even with rulers who were his relatives.” But in the cutthroat, violent world of his reign of more than fifty years, Mithradates was the target of numerous conspiracies and betrayals by his enemies and those closest to him. Yet he maintained many remarkably long-term relationships, with Dorylaus and other boyhood friends, his military companions, allies including Tigranes, his daughters, and the women he loved.
Mithradates scores highly on measures of grandiose self-assessment, and his behavior was at times cruel and vengeful. Yet he cannot be labeled a psychopath. As Bekker-Neilsen remarks, “being charismatic is no vice, and ruthlessness, fratricide . . . grandiosity and promiscuity” were necessary for survival in his milieu. Of course, a low score on the PCL-R is not a certificate of moral integrity: one can do very bad things without being a psychopath.
Recently it has been suggested that some social traits associated with psychopaths and sociopaths—superficial charm, ruthless aggression, manipulation, and callousness—reflect behavioral options that are highly valued in modern business, sports, the armed forces, and politics, leading to the new concept of “successful” sociopaths or psychopaths. This label might fit Mithradates, whose antisocial and sociopathic traits were assets ensuring his survival and memorable achievements. Mithradates also exhibited traits common among successful modern entrepreneurs: bold gambles, high tolerance for risk, resilience in the face of defeat, and unwavering confidence against all odds.