From: george knysh
Message: 66293
Date: 2010-07-11
--- On Sun, 7/11/10, Torsten <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
> --- On Mon, 6/28/10, Torsten <tgpedersen@...> wrote:
Plutarch takes Olthacus' murderous intentions as a fact
http://tinyurl.com/25yqmos
whereas Appian is divided between assuming that and assuming Olcaba' intentions were those he stated himself
http://tinyurl.com/327l7py §79
****GK: Given what we know of Mithradates' suspicious nature, and his proclivities towards eliminating unreliable (to his mind) elements from his entourage, I think the earlier Plutarch version of Olthaces' motivation is preferable to Appian's dichotomic musing. I don't see how Olcaba/Olthacus couyld have survived a return to Mithradates if he had originally defected from him to Lucullus on his own initiative rather than as described by Plutarch.*****
> 73 BC
> http://www.attalus.org/bc1/year73.html
> Beginning of Third Mithridatic War (- 63 BC)
>
> 63 BC
> http://www.attalus.org/bc1/year63.html
>
> Mithridates VI plans invading Italy
> http://tinyurl.com/32p539j
****GK: He seems to have planned this (initially) in Colchis in the winter of 66/65: cf. Appian #101. Cf.http://www.livius.org/ap-ark/appian/appian_mithridatic_21.html#%A7101****
>
> GK: Mithridates' "own army" consisted basically of elements
> directly subject to the Bosporan Kingdom: Greeks and Maeotians, plus
> Pontic and Roman refugees and deserters.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mithridates_VI_of_Pontus
Surely you mean kingdom of Pontus, right?
****GK: right.****
That and Colchis were his first possessions
****GK: It seems that Mithradates acquired control of the Bosporan Kingdom (ca. 110 BCE) a little earlier than of Colchis(ca. 101 BCE): but that is still being discussed.****
and must have delivered more than 'refugees and deserters' to his army.
****GK: Refugees from Pontus and "Roman" deserters, as Appian says.****
> And draftees both slave and free. The "Scythians" (Scythians proper
> and Sarmatians) were independent auxiliaries who had to be bought
> off by promises of dynastic alliances (Appian,#108). This did not
> work. It is very clear that apart from "his own army" Mithridates
> intended to draw on the Gauls, whom he had been cultivating for some
> time (#109). He intended to lead his large motley crew "through
> Thrace to Macedonia, through Macedonia to Pannonia, and passing over
> the Alps into Italy" (#102)
You seem to want to imply that Scythians and similar folk (this is Olthacus/Olcaba's home country, according to Plutarch) could not be made interested in such a large undertaking.
****GK: The point is that Appian used the term "Scythian" quite vaguely. He seems to include ancient Georgians (like the Heniochi), Maeotians (like Dardanians and others, usually subject to the Bosporan kingdom) and occasionally Scythians proper (whom he confuses with Sarmatians at e.g. ) as well as Sarmatians. The "Azov country" pertains to the Maeotians connected politically to Bosporus, like Olthaces' Dardanians, like Sinds and others listed by Strabo. These are the "princes" Mithradates initially drafted via dynastic alliances as described in Appian #102, which you cite here:
Here is the full quote from Appian Mithridates §102
'Mithridates finally reached the Azov country, of which there were many princes, all of whom received him, escorted him, and exchanged presents with him, on account of the fame of his deeds, his empire, and his power, which were still not to be despised. He formed alliances with them in contemplation of other and more novel exploits, such as marching through Thrace to Macedonia, through Macedonia to Pannonia, and passing over the Alps into Italy. With the more powerful of these princes he cemented the alliance by giving his daughters in marriage.'
This text does not support your view.
****GK: But Appian #108/109 does. Mithradates needed to cement alliances with the powerful steppe nomads (Scythians and Sarmatians) who had earlier supported him. But he was betrayed. Cf. http://www.livius.org/ap-ark/appian/appian_mithridatic_22.html#%A7109
"Mithridates, observing these frequent defections, and having suspicions of the army itself, lest it should fail him because the service was compulsory and the taxes very heavy, and because soldiers always lack confidence in unlucky commanders, sent some of his daughters in charge of eunuchs to be married to the Scythian princes, asking them at the same time to send him reinforcements as quickly as possible. Five hundred soldiers accompanied them from his own army. Soon after they left the presence of Mithridates they killed the eunuchs who were leading them (for they always hated these persons, who were all-powerful with Mithridates) and conducted the young women to Pompey.
[§109] Although bereft of so many children and castles and of his whole kingdom, and in no way fit for war, and although he could not expect any aid from the Scythians, still no inferior position, none corresponding to his present misfortunes, even then found a place in his mind. He proposed to turn his course to the Gauls, whose friendship he had cultivated a long time for this purpose, and with them to invade Italy, hoping that many of the Italians themselves would join him on account of their hatred of the Romans;"
> The expedition was to start from
> Panticapeion (today's Kertch in the Crimean Ukraine).
I can't find your source for that?
****GK: It's in Appian #107. Mithradates made Panticapeion his center of operations. He was there in Appian #108, when he was drafting "his own army" (prior to his unsuccessful appeal to the steppe nomads) and there is no record of his leaving it.****
> *Mithridates VI gives Olthaces the task of invading Italy.
>
> GK: Acc. to Appian, the King himself was to lead the army
Where does he say that?
> (there is no hint of any delegation in the text).
I'll make an emendation: Olthaces was to be the leader of the allied Dandarian/Scythian army / expeditionary force.
****GK: We don't know that. In any case this, "Mithradates' own army", which he organized from Panticapeion, was to be assisted by the steppe nomads, and (hopefully) Burebista (since Mithradates wished to reach Italy via Thrace and Pannonia). But they never got started.****
> *Olthaces as leader (*wod-in-) of an army (*wod-)
> *invades Przeworsk by 'Schlieffen plan'
> *going around Burebista's Dacia
>
> GK: The Mithridatian army gathered near Panticapeion, but the
> expedition never got under way. There is no mention of any
> out-movement by anyone.
Movements in Scythian lands would be beyond the Roman horizon of interest.
****GK: Appian was certainly interested enough to point out that no such movement occurred in the steppes (#109)*****
> Mithridates VI commits suicide
>
> ****GK: With the assistance of a Gaulish warrior.****
Named Bituitus, a name known otherwise only from a king of the Arverni
http://www.attalus.org/names/b/bituitus.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bituitus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arverni
so perhaps the Arverni were the Gauls Mithridates was in contact with?
> End of Third Mithridatic War
> *Olthaces, the wod-in- in Przeworsk,
> *must give up attempt for 'Schlieffen plan' against Italy and
> *reconsider his options
>
> GK: This is pure novelistic fantasy. There is no evidence which
> would link the career of Ariovistus to the figures of Mithradates
> and Olthaces.
Well, there's Snorri, of course (*hides under sofa*).
> BTW it is possible (though hardly certain) that the Olthaces in
> Pompey's triumph in 62 was Olthaces the Dandarian. He seems to have
> been a very trusted ally of Mithradates, who just might have
> appointed him "king" of reconquered Colchis (or parts thereof) after
> the unsuccessful attempt on Lucullus. It is however equally
> plausible that these Olthaces were distinct personalities.
>
> As the philosopher Berkeley remarked (I may have mentioned this
> once) "everything is what it is and not another thing".
So true. But everything that was is not immediately accessible to us. Maybe we should ask Berkeley whether those two characters was the same person?
> Olthaces was not Ariovistus.
There's exactly fourteen years between Olthacus' defection to Mithridates
****GK: ?? what defection?****
and Ariovistus telling Caesar that his army had been without a roof for fourteen years.
****GK: This is incoherent. Olthacus the Dardanian certainly had a roof with Mithradates.*****
> And we have no evidence the Germanics were involved in Mithradates'
> Italian plans.
By 60/59, Burebista
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burebista
conquers the Boii and Taurisci; in 65 he would already have been a force to avoid, and Olthaces would have been in a position to know that better than Mithridates.
****GK: Mithradates didn't seem to think so in Colchis. Cf. Appian #101.****