Mithridates Cyrus The Younger

The relationship between Mithridates and Cyrus the Younger emerges from a dramatic episode during the late Achaemenid period, where ambition, betrayal, and power struggles shaped the fate of empires. These figures, especially Cyrus the Younger, are remembered through classical sources such as Xenophon’s Anabasis, which recounts the ill-fated campaign of Cyrus against his brother, the Persian king Artaxerxes II. Mithridates, though a lesser-known figure, plays a critical role in the narrative. His involvement in the events surrounding the Battle of Cunaxa offers insights into Persian military politics, personal loyalty, and court intrigue. This topic explores who Mithridates was, his connection with Cyrus the Younger, and how their story became a pivotal chapter in ancient Persian history.

Cyrus the Younger: Ambition and Rebellion

Background and Early Life

Cyrus the Younger was the younger son of Darius II of Persia and his wife Parysatis. From an early age, Cyrus showed exceptional promise and was given significant responsibilities by his mother, who favored him over his older brother Artaxerxes. As satrap (governor) of Lydia, Phrygia, and Cappadocia, and commander of Persian forces in Asia Minor, Cyrus accumulated great wealth and influence. These resources would later be directed toward an attempt to seize the throne from his brother.

The Conflict with Artaxerxes II

Following the death of Darius II in 404 BCE, Artaxerxes II ascended the Persian throne. Cyrus, dissatisfied with his brother’s rule and driven by ambition, plotted rebellion. He assembled an army composed of both Persian soldiers and a significant contingent of Greek mercenaries some 10,000 hoplites. Cyrus marched inland, concealing his true intentions until he was within striking distance of Artaxerxes’ forces. This confrontation culminated in the Battle of Cunaxa in 401 BCE, a crucial moment for both Cyrus and his allies.

The Role of Mithridates

Who Was Mithridates?

Mithridates was a Persian nobleman, likely associated with the upper echelons of the Achaemenid aristocracy. His name, meaning ‘given by Mithra’ (the Persian god of light and covenant), was common among Persian elites. In the context of Cyrus the Younger’s campaign, Mithridates served as a subordinate military commander or noble attached to the army of Cyrus. However, his exact rank and position remain unclear, as historical references to him are limited.

Mithridates at the Battle of Cunaxa

During the Battle of Cunaxa, Mithridates is reported to have played a minor but symbolically important role. Classical sources, particularly Xenophon, mention that Mithridates had a dispute with Cyrus prior to the battle. According to one account, Mithridates was dismissed or humiliated by Cyrus, which may have led to a personal grudge.

After Cyrus was killed in the battle ironically while on the verge of victory Mithridates reportedly brought the news of his death to Artaxerxes. Some versions of the story suggest that he presented Cyrus’ body or head to the king, expecting a reward. However, Artaxerxes, either out of disgust or suspicion of opportunism, ordered Mithridates’ execution. This dramatic turn of events reflects the volatile nature of Persian court politics, where betrayal was often repaid with suspicion, not favor.

Xenophon’s Account in the Anabasis

Historical Context

Xenophon, an Athenian soldier and historian, participated in Cyrus the Younger’s campaign and later chronicled the Greek mercenaries’ retreat in his work Anabasis. This text serves as a primary source for understanding the campaign and the roles of individuals like Mithridates. While Xenophon’s account may be biased toward the Greek perspective, it offers vivid details of the events surrounding Cunaxa.

Mithridates in the Anabasis

In Anabasis, Mithridates is briefly mentioned in connection with his treacherous behavior and its consequences. His actions after the death of Cyrus highlight the shifting loyalties among Persian nobles and the precarious nature of seeking favor in a royal court during times of war. Xenophon’s portrayal of Mithridates reflects the general Greek disdain for perceived Persian duplicity, but also underscores the personal motives that often influenced key decisions in ancient warfare.

Lessons from the Fall of Cyrus and the Fate of Mithridates

The Fragility of Alliances

The story of Mithridates and Cyrus the Younger illustrates how fragile alliances were within the Persian Empire. Even close confidants could become enemies, and loyalty was often tested by ambition or survival. Cyrus’s failure to maintain unity among his ranks, including figures like Mithridates, was a critical factor in his downfall.

Consequences of Betrayal

Mithridates’s fate serves as a cautionary tale about betrayal. Although he may have believed that switching allegiance after Cyrus’s death would gain him favor, the unpredictable nature of Persian royal politics proved otherwise. His execution by Artaxerxes shows that acts of betrayal, even when seemingly helpful, could lead to condemnation rather than reward.

The Broader Impact on Persian History

The defeat and death of Cyrus the Younger marked a turning point in Achaemenid history. While Artaxerxes II retained power, the rebellion exposed deep fractures within the empire. It also revealed the vulnerabilities of the Persian monarchy and the potential for internal conflict to undermine even the most powerful rulers. The involvement of Greek mercenaries further foreshadowed increasing Hellenic influence in Persian affairs, which would culminate decades later in Alexander the Great’s conquest.

Cyrus’s Legacy and Historical Significance

Heroism and Tragedy

Cyrus the Younger has often been depicted as a tragic hero brave, charismatic, and noble in ambition, but ultimately undone by overconfidence and betrayal. His decision to march against his brother was bold but fatal. Nevertheless, his campaign has captivated historians and readers for centuries, thanks largely to Xenophon’s dramatic storytelling.

Mithridates as a Symbol

Mithridates, though a minor figure, symbolizes the dangers of navigating political ambition in an empire rife with intrigue. His short-lived act of betrayal underscores the complexity of Persian court life, where personal loyalty, ambition, and survival often clashed. The name Mithridates would later become famous again in the context of Mithridates VI of Pontus, but in the story of Cyrus the Younger, this early Mithridates stands as a fleeting but impactful figure.

The intertwined lives of Cyrus the Younger and Mithridates form a dramatic episode in the broader narrative of Achaemenid Persia. While Cyrus sought to reshape the empire through courage and ambition, Mithridates’ opportunism reflects the darker undercurrents of loyalty and power in ancient politics. Their story, preserved through classical texts, continues to offer timeless lessons about leadership, betrayal, and the unpredictable tides of history.