No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
MITHRIDATES THE PATRICIDE (VAL. MAX. 9.11.EXT.2)
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2019
Extract
In a chapter illustrating outrageous words and criminal deeds (dicta improba aut facta scelerata), Valerius Maximus, the Tiberian editor of exempla, includes in his list of foreign (externa) examples reference to an impious son, Mithridates, who fought with his father over who should rule (9.11.ext.2):
Mitridates autem multo sceleratius, qui non cum fratre de paterno regno, sed cum ipso patre bellum de dominatione gessit. in quo qui aut homines ullos adiutores inuenerit aut deos inuocare ausus sit, † pare admiratione habet †.
- Type
- Shorter Notes
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © The Classical Association 2019
Footnotes
I wish to thank David Wardle for his comments on an earlier draft of this note.
References
1 Briscoe, J. (ed.), Valeri Maximi Facta et dicta memorabilia, 2 vols. (Stuttgart and Leipzig, 1998)Google Scholar. Briscoe obelizes the final phrase; my translation, however, follows Halm's emendation: pare<m> admiratione<m> habet, which is also accepted by Bailey, D.R. Shackleton (ed. and transl.), Valerius Maximus: Memorable Doings and Sayings, 2 vols. (Cambridge, MA, 2000)Google Scholar.
2 Kempf, K. (ed.), Valerii Maximi Factorum et dictorum memorabilium libri novem cum Iulii Paridis et Ianuarii Nepotiani Epitomis (Leipzig, 1888)Google Scholar. The apparatus criticus prints the following: Mitridatis autem m. sceleratius <Pharnaces filius>; Mitridatis was subsequently emended (by Briscoe and others) to Mithridates through comparison with Valerius’ epitomator Julius Paris.
3 Shackleton Bailey (n. 1), 364–5 n. 9.
4 Walker, H.J., Valerius Maximus. Memorable Deeds and Sayings. One Thousand Tales from Ancient Rome (Indianapolis, 2004)Google Scholar, 338 n. 205.
5 Walker (n. 4), 338 n. 206.
6 Faranda, R. (ed. and transl.), Valerio Massimo: Detti e fatti memorabili (Turin, 1971)Google Scholar, ad loc. All translations are mine, unless stated otherwise.
7 On his death, see n. 12 below. The variorum edition by Kappius, J. (ed.), Valerii Maximi Factorum dictorumque memorabilium libri novem ex editione Joannis Kappii cum notis et interpretatione in usum Delphini, variis lectionibus, notis variorum, recensu editionum et codicum, et indice locupletissimo accurate recensiti, 3 vols. (London, 1823)Google Scholar, 2.876 n. 1, suggests Mithridates, king of Parthia, instead: ‘Non Ponticus, populi Romani hostis; qui teste Justino, moriente patre puer erat: sed forte Mithridates Rex Parthorum.’
8 McGing, B.C., The Foreign Policy of Mithridates VI Eupator King of Pontus (Leiden, 1986), 13–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar briefly sketches the dynastic origins of this family; he is, however, guilty of the same error as others below, namely of incorrectly citing Val. Max. 9.11.7 as the exemplum discussing Ariobarzanes’ death in 362. See also McGing, B.C., ‘The kings of Pontus: some problems of identity and date’, RhM 129 (1986), 248–59Google Scholar; Bosworth, A.B. and Wheatley, P.V., ‘The origins of the Pontic House’, JHS 118 (1998), 155–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar, at 160 n. 55; Debord, P., L'Asie Mineure au IVe Siècle (412–323 a. C.). Pouvoirs et Jeux Politiques (Bordeaux, 1999), 99 n. 129CrossRefGoogle Scholar, who misprints Val. Max. 9.11.ext.12; Burstein, S.M., Outpost of Hellenism: The Emergence of Heraclea on the Black Sea (Berkeley, 1974), 129 n. 56Google Scholar, who lists ‘Valerius Maximus 9.11.2’ instead of the external exemplum from the same chapter; Sherman, C.L. (ed. and transl.), Diodorus of Sicily, vol. 7 (London and Cambridge, MA, 1963), 202 n. 1Google Scholar; and Weiskopf, M., The So-Called “Great Satraps’ Revolt”, 366–360 b.c.: Concerning Local Instability in the Achaemenid Far West (Stuttgart, 1989), 26–54Google Scholar.
9 Dindorf, W. (ed.), Harpocrationis Lexicon in decem oratores Atticos (Oxford, 1853)Google Scholar.
10 Although the chapter's focus is dicta improba aut facta scelerata, parricide specifically is an important aspect running throughout. In 9.11.1, Tullia is complicit in her father's murder; at 9.11.3 Catiline's conspiracy is characterized as parricide; 9.11.5 records a parricide from the triumviral period along with 9.11.6; 9.11.ext.3 relates Sariaster's conspiracy against his father Tigranes; and, finally, the climactic exemplum of the chapter presents Sejanus’ conspiracy against Tiberius as an attempted parricide of the parens of Rome.
11 See Burstein (n. 8), 126 n. 7.
12 Val. Max. 9.2.ext.3 records that this Mithridates ‘forced his struggling breath to succumb to poison’ (ueneno repugnantem spiritum suum tandem succumbere coegit). Valerius’ abbreviated description of Mithridates’ ‘suicide’ elides some of the details of his death. This is possibly because the circumstances surrounding his death are somewhat obscure. One tradition maintains that he tried to commit suicide by poison, but, being immune to its effects because of a lifetime of experiment with toxicology and self-administered antidotes, he requested the Gaul Bituitus to kill him. Another tradition maintains that he was murdered by troops who had deserted to his son; cf. Livy, Per. 102; Just. Epit. 37.1–2, 37.6; App. Mith. 111; Gal. Ther. Pis. 14.283–4; Gell. NA 17.16; Aur. Vict. Caes. 1.76; Oros. 6.5; Flor. 1.40; Plut. Pomp. 41; Dio Cass. 37.13.