1. Birth-Family

Mitrídates VI Eupator Dionysos was born in Amaseia(Amasya) (132 B.C.). He was the son of Mithridates V and Laodice. In the year of his birth and of his accession to the throne a comet appeared in the sky.¹

2. Education-Upbringing

His education was Greek, although perhaps with persian influences. He probably had as fellows the young members of important families from the Kingdom.² As a result, Mithridates learnt not only the art of war, but also rhetoric and many languages.³ His youth was problematic. His father died in 121 B.C., and Laodice became regent. It has been said that Mithridates fled from the court, where the tutors wanted to kill him, and remained hidden for seven years. When he returned, he took the power.⁴

3. Biography

Once he became a king, Mithridates began an ambitious policy of territorial expansion and took the control over Armenia (Minor) and Colchis. In the region of the Cimmerian Bosporus, Diophantus, a general, obtained victories over the Scythians, rescuing the city of Chersonesos. Inmediately after, Diophantus had to subdue the revolt led by Saumakos, a Scythian who arose the population of the Bosporan Kingdom against the testament of its last King, Pairisades V, who had left the kingdom to Mithridates as heritage.⁵ The Pontic king also controlled other cities in the northern coast of the Black Sea.⁶ Mithridates, who had married his sister Laodice, had to flee from Pontus, probably due to a plot in the court. After a journey to the Roman Province of Asia, Mithridates ended the intrigues, in which his sister had an important role along with important members of the court.⁷ Mithridates may have had at that point the support of the Greek traders of Pontus, who were interested not only in strenghtening the Hellenic culture, but also in wider perspectives of commercial exchanges and economic activities. This is probably reflected in certain inscriptions and monuments from Delos built by the Pontic King. Some of them are devoted to divinities who protect navigation.⁸ Around 108 B.C., Mithridates agreed with Nicomedes III of Bithynia a partition of Paphlagonia, which was without a king. The Roman Senate sent a mission to restore the country to its former situation. However, there was no real change. Inmediately after that, Mithridates and Nicomedes conquered Galatia.⁹ In regard to that situation, a Pontic embassy was send to Rome, but it suffered the mockery from the tribune Appuleius Saturninus.¹⁰

Like his father, Mithridates aimed to control Cappadocia. The ruling dynasty suffered the dissidence from an important part of the nobility, which had instigated the death of Ariarathes VI. His widow Laodice, sister of the Pontic king, remained as regent of the young Ariarathes VII. Nicomedes married her, after invading the country. Eupator send troops to expulse the Bithynians and restor his nephew to the throne. Although temporarily good relations prevailed, Eupator took advantage of the dissidence of the Cappadocian nobility, he declared war and murdered the young king. Afterwards, he established his 8year-old son as king of Cappadocia, with the dynastic name of Ariarathes. Gordios, leader of the Cappadocian nobility, acted as his tutor. When the other sector of the Cappadocian nobles complained, Rome appointed as king Ariobarzanes, one of them.¹¹ In this context may be placed the interview between Marius and Mithridates (around 99/98 B.C.).¹²

Ariobarzanes was not able to keep the power, but he was restored by Sulla (96 B.C.).¹³ Even so, as the opposition of a faction among the nobility persisted, Eupator, with their support and that of Tigranes from Armenia expulsed the king again, and re-restored his son, Ariarathes IX. At the end of 92 B.C., Nicomedes died. Mithridates supported Chrestus, who was a pretender to the throne against his half brother, Nicomedes. Rome sent a mission with M. Aquillius, which ordered the withdrawal of the Pontic troops. Eupator obeyed, but Nicomedes took the opportunity and invaded the Mithridatic territory. The complaints to the Romans were not attended. As the reaction of Mithridates was inmediate, the 1st Mithridatic War started which ended with the peace of Dardanus.

The ambiguity of the peace of Dardanus allowed L. Murena to take over a campaign against the Pontic Kingdom (the so-called 2nd Mithridatic War), which ended with important victories of Mithridates. The King, who had repeatedly complainted to Rome, agreed a new treatie, which was also not effective.¹⁴ At that time, Mithridates also fought against some tribes from the north black Sea coasts.¹⁵

The 3rd Mithridatic War started in 73 B.C., when Nicomedes IV died, legating his Kingdom to the Roman people.¹⁶ Mithridates refused to make an agreement with either Lucullus or Pompey. Eventually, he fled to Armenia Menor and from there, around the coast of the Black Sea to the Bosporan Kingdom. He recovered it after puting to death his son, Machares, who had deserted to the Roman side.

4. Death

While Mithridates was a refuge, he tried to reorganize his army at the Bosporn Kingdom. However, a revolt leadered by his son, Pharnaces (II), led him to suicide. He died in Panticapaeum (Kertch) at 63 B.C. and his body arrived by sea to Sinope.¹⁷

5. Evaluation-Judgements

Mithridates VI developped a wide propaganda, which related him to Alexander the Great, Heracles, Dionysus and perhaps to other divinities and heroes.¹⁸ He was the king who would avenge Asia, a place with a long support in the Oriental apocalyptical tradition, which had also been adopted by the Greek world.¹⁹ This propaganda is reflected in historical texts, oracles, coins and monuments. Various so-called ‘social measures’ (distribution of lands, remision of debts, freedom of slaves) had not been an attempt for a social revolution; they must be understood as an aspect of this propaganda.

The government of the Pontic Kingdom under Eupator is basically not different from that of the other Hellenistic Kingdoms. The Greek cities enjoyed a relative autonomy, remaining with their ancestral institutions as long as they did not hide the ruler's policy. As was common among the Hellenistic Kingdoms, certain important cities might have had garrisons of troops and supervisors from the royal authority. Just as his predecessors, Mithridates founded new city-states and enacted laws which favoured the cities. He also made certain towns in Pontus to mint coins with their respective names, to present an image of urban and civic life. The government of the remaining territories of the kingdom were similar to the ancestral one, including the existence of important temple-states, as that of Comana Pontica or Zela. The other areas of the Black Sea were governed under supervision of royal governors, or indeed the sons of the King. Besides, the relationship between Mithridates and the barbarian peoples from the Black Sea may have been based on agreements, from which we have no precise news.

The ancient sources, predominantly pro-Roman, reflect a cruel and blood-thirsty image of Mithridates. Many barbarian characteristics are atributted to him: luxury, fierceness, greed, love to drinking. He was also famous for his knowledge of poissons. It was said, sometimes without firm support, that he murdered his mother and several of his brothers and sons. But, at the same time, his magnitude, his audacity, his magnanimity, his eloquence and his vigour were recognised. Trogus says that Mithridates was the greatest king of all times, and Cicero considered him as the greatest king after Alexander.²⁰

Classical historiography assigned Mithridates the role of successor of the Persian Kings, that may faced to Roman generals which strove to appear as imitators of Alexander and models of Greek virtues. The tradition of classical studies have also regarded Mithridates in a similar context: as enemy of Rome, he was an enemy of civilization; as expected, he did not belong to the classical civilization, but to the Oriental – Persian tradition which resists to the progress of the Graeco-Roman world.

To certain modern studies, the reign of Mithridates represents the last highlight of the Hellenistic world. The King applied to the Greek city-states of the Black Sea the integration into a unified state, as had happened in other areas under Alexander. At the same time, Mithridates was the last independent king (apart from the Parthians) who faced Rome. He was the leader of the last great anti-Roman upheaval inside the Greek world. Having Achaemenid and Macedonian ancestors, he knew how to show different images to the cultures which were under his rule, just as Alexander and many other Hellenistic kings did.