The Cappaodican kingdom began and ended in the hands of other more powerful polities in Asia Minor. The kingdom grew out of suzerainty to the Achaemenid Empire when Alexander the Great toppled the Achaemenids and largely bypassed Cappadocia
[1]
, but the kingdom eventually returned to being a province under the next greatest power, Rome, in the early first century CE. Even during the peak reign of Cappadocian kings, the polity was fought over and used by the kings of its neighbouring polities to strengthen their positions of power or to buffer their state against the ambitions of another. This happened to such an extent that Mithridates VI Eupator, king of Pontus, placed both his nephew and son on the Cappadocian throne, only to kill the first to reinforce the claim of the latter, much to the antagonism of Nicomedes III, king of Bithynia at the time, who claimed his own right to a puppet on the Cappadocian throne. The incident resulted in the intervention of Rome who declared the ‘freedom’ of Cappadocia from monarchs (in theory) so that neither the kingdoms of Pontus or Bithynia could use Cappadocia for their own gains. The kingdom was then ruled by kings favoured by the Roman Senate until the death of Archelaus who was the last king of Cappadocia, places there by Antony.
As a result of Cappadocia’s relatively minor position during this time, very little textual (or other) direct evidence from the kingdom has survived. Numismatic evidence does give some detailed information about the chronology of kings, but even this is debated
[2]
[3]
. Instead, much of what is known about the kingdom of Cappadocia comes from accounts of the foreign policy of its neighbours, particularly Rome at the time. The main historian who discussed Cappadocia was Strabo, and his accounts lack the detailed information on Cappadocia which other polities have
[4]
.
[1]: (Ansen 1988, 471) E M Ansen. 1988. Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477.
[2]: (Simonetta 1977) B Simonetta. 1977. The Coins of the Cappadocian Kings. Fribourg: Office du Livre.
[3]: (Dimitriev 2006, 286) S Dmitriev. 2006. Cappadocian Dynastic Rearrangements on the Eve of the First Mithridatic War. Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 55, H. 3, pp. 285-297.
[4]: (Rostovtzeff 1941, 838) M Rostovtzeff. 1941. The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World, Volume 2. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
| nominal allegiance to [---] | |
| alliance with [---] | |
| personal union with [---] | |
| vassalage to [---] |
| Late Roman Republic |
| continuity |
| UNCLEAR: [continuity] |
| nominal | |
| unitary state | |
| loose |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| inferred present |
| Year Range | Late Cappadocia (tr_cappadocia_2) was in: |
|---|---|
| (129 BCE 95 BCE) | Konya Plain |
{Mazaca; Ariaratheia; Mazaca-Eusebeia} Mazaca, or Mazaca-Eusebeia, was the main capital of Cappadocia(Sherwin-White, 1984, p40), although Araiathes II attempted to build another capital named after himself (Ariaratheia) which “sank into oblivion” (Rostovteff, p839)
{Mazaca; Ariaratheia; Mazaca-Eusebeia} Mazaca, or Mazaca-Eusebeia, was the main capital of Cappadocia(Sherwin-White, 1984, p40), although Araiathes II attempted to build another capital named after himself (Ariaratheia) which “sank into oblivion” (Rostovteff, p839)
These dates correspond to the main ruling of the Ariarathid dynasty, before being taken over by rival polities (Pontus and Bithynia) and then becoming more closely affiliated with Rome. The earlier date is from when Ariarathes II regained the throne from the Roman Eumenes
[1]
; and the later date corresponds to the rule of Ariarathes IX.
[1]: Simonetta, B. (1977) The Coins of the Cappadocian Kings. Fribourg: Office du Livre, p15-16
{380 BCE; 322 BCE}-{95 BCE; 93 BCE; 17 CE} ... written as code, these are the alternative dates. However we cannot code uncertainty for the duration variable. 380 BCE - 17 CE would be the code for the broadest definition.
Although the territory of Cappadocia had a ruler before 322 BCE, it was only after Alexander’s conquests in Asia Minor and the collapse of the Achaemenid Empire that Cappadocia became an independent kingdom.
[1]
The polity gradually fell into other hands, and was fought over by the more prominent powers in Asia Minor, Pontus and Bithynia, as well as the Roman Empire to the west
[2]
[3]
. Cappadocia was in a good strategic position for all of these polities to either extend their own states or to buffer the territory they already had. The end of the rule of the Ariarathid dynasty came in the 90s BCE, although the exact dates are unknown. At this time, the kingdoms of Pontus and Bithynia were fighting over Cappadocia (and murdering or marrying those in the Cappadocian ruling family to gain a footing), until Rome declared the ‘freedom’ of Cappadocia. From then on, Cappadocia was ruled by Ariobarzanes, by the grace of Rome, and was eventually to be annexed by Rome
[4]
[5]
. The end dates correspond to the end of the Ariarathid dynasty (c. 95 BCE) and then to the end of the rule of Archelaus (17 CE)
[6]
.
The rulers of Cappadocia:
[7]
[8]
[9]
Datames (c. 380-362 BCE)
Ariamnes I (362-350 BCE)
Mithrobuzanes (died 334 BCE)
Ariarathes I (350-331 BCE)
Ariarathes I (331-322 BCE)
Ariarathes II (301-280 BCE)
Ariaramnes (c. 275-225 BCE)
Ariarathes III (c. 225-220 BCE)
Ariarathes IV Eusebes (220-163 BCE)
Ariarathes V Eusebes Philopator (163-130 BCE)
Orophernes (157 BCE)
Ariarathes VI Epiphanes Philopator (130-116 BCE)
Ariarathes VII Philometor (116-101 BCE)
Ariarathes VIII (101-96 BCE)
Ariarathes IX (c.95 BCE)
Ariobarzanes I Philoromaios (95-63 BCE)
Ariobarzanes II Philopator (c. 63-51 BCE)
Ariobarzanes III Eusebes Philoromaios (52-42 BCE)
Ariarathes X Eusebes Philadelphos (42-36 BCE)
Archelaus (36 BCE - 17 CE)
[1]: Simonetta, B. (1977) The Coins of the Cappadocian Kings. Fribourg: Office du Livre, p15-16
[2]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1977) Roman Involvement in Anatolia, 167-88 B. C. The Journal of Roman Studies. 67, pp. 62-75.
[3]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth.
[4]: Ansen, E. M. (1988) Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477, p472
[5]: Eilers, C. (2003) A Roman East: Pompey’s Settlement to the Death of Augustus. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Hellenistic World. Blackwell: Malden, Oxford, pp90-102, p90
[6]: Simonetta, B. (1977) The Coins of the Cappadocian Kings. Fribourg: Office du Livre, p45-46
[7]: Iossif, P. P and Lorber, C. C. (2010) Hypaithros: A Numismatic Contribution to the Military History of Cappadocia. Historia, Band 59/4, Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart. p432
[8]: Dmitriev, S. (2006) Cappadocian Dynastic Rearrangements on the Eve of the First Mithridatic War. Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 55, H. 3, pp. 285-297.
[9]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_rulers_of_Cappadocia
{380-331 BCE: nominal allegiance}; 331-95 BCE: alliance, personal union; {95 BCE - 17 CE}: vassalage
The kings of Cappadocia maintained their position in through alliances with the neighbouring powers, including Rome, Bithynia, Pergamon, Pontus and the Seleucid Empire
[1]
[2]
. Marriage arrangements were made between the royal dynasties of some of these polities (most importantly the Seleucid empire and the Pontic kingdom)
[3]
[4]
. The alliances were however, often short-lived and either followed or were followed by aggressive relations between the two polities. Before 322 BCE, Ariarathes I (the ruler of Cappadocia) may have nominally been under the authority of the Achaemenid Persian Empire; and after the brief rule of Ariarathes IX Cappadocia effectively became a Roman province and was ruled by Ariobarzanes (I, II and III) in ‘friendly’ relations with Rome.
[5]
[6]
It should also be noted that even when the kingdom of Cappadocia was ruled by independent kings as a unitary state, Rome still exerted influence on Cappadocian politics. Twice, when there was internal feuding between claimants to the Cappadocian throne, Rome intervened and either declared the kingdom split between the monarchs or freed from the monarchy altogether. This happened after the dispute between the brothers Ariarathes V and Orophernes in 159/8 BCE
[7]
[8]
; and between Ariarathes IX (Mithridates VI Eupator of Pontus’ son) and the claimant put forward by Nicomedes, king of Bithynia around 97 BCE
[9]
.
[1]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth, p41
[2]: Bowder, D. (ed.) (1982) Who was Who in the Greek World, 776 BC - 30 BC. Phaidon: Oxford, p54
[3]: McGing, B. (2003) Subjection and Resistance: to the death of Mithradates. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A companion to the Hellenistic World. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp71-89, p85
[4]: Kosmetatou, E. (2003) The Attalids of Pergamon. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Hellenistic World. Blackwell: Malden, Oxford, pp159-174, p164
[5]: Ansen, E. M. (1988) Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477, p472
[6]: Eilers, C. (2003) A Roman East: Pompey’s Settlement to the Death of Augustus. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Hellenistic World. Blackwell: Malden, Oxford, pp90-102, p90
[7]: McGing, B. (2003) Subjection and Resistance: to the death of Mithradates. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A companion to the Hellenistic World. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp71-89, p77
[8]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1977) Roman Involvement in Anatolia, 167-88 B. C. The Journal of Roman Studies. 67, pp. 62-75, p63
[9]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1977) Roman Involvement in Anatolia, 167-88 B. C. The Journal of Roman Studies. 67, pp. 62-75, p71-2
{380-331 BCE: nominal allegiance}; 331-95 BCE: alliance, personal union; {95 BCE - 17 CE}: vassalage
The kings of Cappadocia maintained their position in through alliances with the neighbouring powers, including Rome, Bithynia, Pergamon, Pontus and the Seleucid Empire
[1]
[2]
. Marriage arrangements were made between the royal dynasties of some of these polities (most importantly the Seleucid empire and the Pontic kingdom)
[3]
[4]
. The alliances were however, often short-lived and either followed or were followed by aggressive relations between the two polities. Before 322 BCE, Ariarathes I (the ruler of Cappadocia) may have nominally been under the authority of the Achaemenid Persian Empire; and after the brief rule of Ariarathes IX Cappadocia effectively became a Roman province and was ruled by Ariobarzanes (I, II and III) in ‘friendly’ relations with Rome.
[5]
[6]
It should also be noted that even when the kingdom of Cappadocia was ruled by independent kings as a unitary state, Rome still exerted influence on Cappadocian politics. Twice, when there was internal feuding between claimants to the Cappadocian throne, Rome intervened and either declared the kingdom split between the monarchs or freed from the monarchy altogether. This happened after the dispute between the brothers Ariarathes V and Orophernes in 159/8 BCE
[7]
[8]
; and between Ariarathes IX (Mithridates VI Eupator of Pontus’ son) and the claimant put forward by Nicomedes, king of Bithynia around 97 BCE
[9]
.
[1]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth, p41
[2]: Bowder, D. (ed.) (1982) Who was Who in the Greek World, 776 BC - 30 BC. Phaidon: Oxford, p54
[3]: McGing, B. (2003) Subjection and Resistance: to the death of Mithradates. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A companion to the Hellenistic World. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp71-89, p85
[4]: Kosmetatou, E. (2003) The Attalids of Pergamon. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Hellenistic World. Blackwell: Malden, Oxford, pp159-174, p164
[5]: Ansen, E. M. (1988) Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477, p472
[6]: Eilers, C. (2003) A Roman East: Pompey’s Settlement to the Death of Augustus. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Hellenistic World. Blackwell: Malden, Oxford, pp90-102, p90
[7]: McGing, B. (2003) Subjection and Resistance: to the death of Mithradates. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A companion to the Hellenistic World. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp71-89, p77
[8]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1977) Roman Involvement in Anatolia, 167-88 B. C. The Journal of Roman Studies. 67, pp. 62-75, p63
[9]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1977) Roman Involvement in Anatolia, 167-88 B. C. The Journal of Roman Studies. 67, pp. 62-75, p71-2
{380-331 BCE: nominal allegiance}; 331-95 BCE: alliance, personal union; {95 BCE - 17 CE}: vassalage
The kings of Cappadocia maintained their position in through alliances with the neighbouring powers, including Rome, Bithynia, Pergamon, Pontus and the Seleucid Empire
[1]
[2]
. Marriage arrangements were made between the royal dynasties of some of these polities (most importantly the Seleucid empire and the Pontic kingdom)
[3]
[4]
. The alliances were however, often short-lived and either followed or were followed by aggressive relations between the two polities. Before 322 BCE, Ariarathes I (the ruler of Cappadocia) may have nominally been under the authority of the Achaemenid Persian Empire; and after the brief rule of Ariarathes IX Cappadocia effectively became a Roman province and was ruled by Ariobarzanes (I, II and III) in ‘friendly’ relations with Rome.
[5]
[6]
It should also be noted that even when the kingdom of Cappadocia was ruled by independent kings as a unitary state, Rome still exerted influence on Cappadocian politics. Twice, when there was internal feuding between claimants to the Cappadocian throne, Rome intervened and either declared the kingdom split between the monarchs or freed from the monarchy altogether. This happened after the dispute between the brothers Ariarathes V and Orophernes in 159/8 BCE
[7]
[8]
; and between Ariarathes IX (Mithridates VI Eupator of Pontus’ son) and the claimant put forward by Nicomedes, king of Bithynia around 97 BCE
[9]
.
[1]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth, p41
[2]: Bowder, D. (ed.) (1982) Who was Who in the Greek World, 776 BC - 30 BC. Phaidon: Oxford, p54
[3]: McGing, B. (2003) Subjection and Resistance: to the death of Mithradates. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A companion to the Hellenistic World. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp71-89, p85
[4]: Kosmetatou, E. (2003) The Attalids of Pergamon. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Hellenistic World. Blackwell: Malden, Oxford, pp159-174, p164
[5]: Ansen, E. M. (1988) Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477, p472
[6]: Eilers, C. (2003) A Roman East: Pompey’s Settlement to the Death of Augustus. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Hellenistic World. Blackwell: Malden, Oxford, pp90-102, p90
[7]: McGing, B. (2003) Subjection and Resistance: to the death of Mithradates. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A companion to the Hellenistic World. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp71-89, p77
[8]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1977) Roman Involvement in Anatolia, 167-88 B. C. The Journal of Roman Studies. 67, pp. 62-75, p63
[9]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1977) Roman Involvement in Anatolia, 167-88 B. C. The Journal of Roman Studies. 67, pp. 62-75, p71-2
{380-331 BCE: nominal allegiance}; 331-95 BCE: alliance, personal union; {95 BCE - 17 CE}: vassalage
The kings of Cappadocia maintained their position in through alliances with the neighbouring powers, including Rome, Bithynia, Pergamon, Pontus and the Seleucid Empire
[1]
[2]
. Marriage arrangements were made between the royal dynasties of some of these polities (most importantly the Seleucid empire and the Pontic kingdom)
[3]
[4]
. The alliances were however, often short-lived and either followed or were followed by aggressive relations between the two polities. Before 322 BCE, Ariarathes I (the ruler of Cappadocia) may have nominally been under the authority of the Achaemenid Persian Empire; and after the brief rule of Ariarathes IX Cappadocia effectively became a Roman province and was ruled by Ariobarzanes (I, II and III) in ‘friendly’ relations with Rome.
[5]
[6]
It should also be noted that even when the kingdom of Cappadocia was ruled by independent kings as a unitary state, Rome still exerted influence on Cappadocian politics. Twice, when there was internal feuding between claimants to the Cappadocian throne, Rome intervened and either declared the kingdom split between the monarchs or freed from the monarchy altogether. This happened after the dispute between the brothers Ariarathes V and Orophernes in 159/8 BCE
[7]
[8]
; and between Ariarathes IX (Mithridates VI Eupator of Pontus’ son) and the claimant put forward by Nicomedes, king of Bithynia around 97 BCE
[9]
.
[1]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth, p41
[2]: Bowder, D. (ed.) (1982) Who was Who in the Greek World, 776 BC - 30 BC. Phaidon: Oxford, p54
[3]: McGing, B. (2003) Subjection and Resistance: to the death of Mithradates. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A companion to the Hellenistic World. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp71-89, p85
[4]: Kosmetatou, E. (2003) The Attalids of Pergamon. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Hellenistic World. Blackwell: Malden, Oxford, pp159-174, p164
[5]: Ansen, E. M. (1988) Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477, p472
[6]: Eilers, C. (2003) A Roman East: Pompey’s Settlement to the Death of Augustus. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Hellenistic World. Blackwell: Malden, Oxford, pp90-102, p90
[7]: McGing, B. (2003) Subjection and Resistance: to the death of Mithradates. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A companion to the Hellenistic World. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp71-89, p77
[8]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1977) Roman Involvement in Anatolia, 167-88 B. C. The Journal of Roman Studies. 67, pp. 62-75, p63
[9]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1977) Roman Involvement in Anatolia, 167-88 B. C. The Journal of Roman Studies. 67, pp. 62-75, p71-2
380-331 BCE: nominal; {331 BCE; 301 BCE}-96 BCE: unitary state; 99 BCE - 17 CE: loose dates are not machine readable yet - ET
The Cappadocian rulers paid nominal allegiance to the Achaemenid Empire before it collapsed in 331 BCE
[1]
. After Alexander’s conquest of Asia Minor, Ariarathes I established himself as the first king of Cappadocia (a region largely left alone by Alexander) and ruled from 331 - 322 BCE. There was, however, some disagreement with Rome after Ariarathes I and the dynasty only continued when his son, Ariarathes II, regained the throne from the Roman Eumenes in 301 BCE. The Ariarathid dynasty then ruled until the 90s BCE, and ruled as the head of all state and religious affairs.
The last Ariarathes (IX Eusebes) was the son of the Pontic king Mithridates VI Eupator, who was ousted by the Roman Senate and eventually replaced by the elected Ariobarzanes I
[2]
[3]
. Ariobarzanes I, II, III and Ariarathes X then ruled Cappadocia from 95 - 36 BCE and maintained friendship with Rome during that time, leading up to Cappadocia becoming a province of the Roman Empire in AD 17.
[1]: Ansen, E. M. (1988) Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477, p472
[2]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth, p71-71; 106-107
[3]: Rubinsohn, W. Z. (1993) Mithradates VI Eupator Dionysos and Rome’s conquest of the Hellenistic East. Mediterranean Historical Review, 8(1), pp. 5-54. p18-19
380-331 BCE: nominal; {331 BCE; 301 BCE}-96 BCE: unitary state; 99 BCE - 17 CE: loose dates are not machine readable yet - ET
The Cappadocian rulers paid nominal allegiance to the Achaemenid Empire before it collapsed in 331 BCE
[1]
. After Alexander’s conquest of Asia Minor, Ariarathes I established himself as the first king of Cappadocia (a region largely left alone by Alexander) and ruled from 331 - 322 BCE. There was, however, some disagreement with Rome after Ariarathes I and the dynasty only continued when his son, Ariarathes II, regained the throne from the Roman Eumenes in 301 BCE. The Ariarathid dynasty then ruled until the 90s BCE, and ruled as the head of all state and religious affairs.
The last Ariarathes (IX Eusebes) was the son of the Pontic king Mithridates VI Eupator, who was ousted by the Roman Senate and eventually replaced by the elected Ariobarzanes I
[2]
[3]
. Ariobarzanes I, II, III and Ariarathes X then ruled Cappadocia from 95 - 36 BCE and maintained friendship with Rome during that time, leading up to Cappadocia becoming a province of the Roman Empire in AD 17.
[1]: Ansen, E. M. (1988) Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477, p472
[2]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth, p71-71; 106-107
[3]: Rubinsohn, W. Z. (1993) Mithradates VI Eupator Dionysos and Rome’s conquest of the Hellenistic East. Mediterranean Historical Review, 8(1), pp. 5-54. p18-19
380-331 BCE: nominal; {331 BCE; 301 BCE}-96 BCE: unitary state; 99 BCE - 17 CE: loose dates are not machine readable yet - ET
The Cappadocian rulers paid nominal allegiance to the Achaemenid Empire before it collapsed in 331 BCE
[1]
. After Alexander’s conquest of Asia Minor, Ariarathes I established himself as the first king of Cappadocia (a region largely left alone by Alexander) and ruled from 331 - 322 BCE. There was, however, some disagreement with Rome after Ariarathes I and the dynasty only continued when his son, Ariarathes II, regained the throne from the Roman Eumenes in 301 BCE. The Ariarathid dynasty then ruled until the 90s BCE, and ruled as the head of all state and religious affairs.
The last Ariarathes (IX Eusebes) was the son of the Pontic king Mithridates VI Eupator, who was ousted by the Roman Senate and eventually replaced by the elected Ariobarzanes I
[2]
[3]
. Ariobarzanes I, II, III and Ariarathes X then ruled Cappadocia from 95 - 36 BCE and maintained friendship with Rome during that time, leading up to Cappadocia becoming a province of the Roman Empire in AD 17.
[1]: Ansen, E. M. (1988) Antigonus, the Satrap of Phrygia. Historia: Zeitschrift für Alte Geschichte, Bd. 37, H. 4 (4th Qtr.), pp. 471-477, p472
[2]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth, p71-71; 106-107
[3]: Rubinsohn, W. Z. (1993) Mithradates VI Eupator Dionysos and Rome’s conquest of the Hellenistic East. Mediterranean Historical Review, 8(1), pp. 5-54. p18-19
squared kilometers. 130,000: 129 BCE
Turkey-in-Asia had 5,500,000 in 100 BCE.
[1]
Cappadocia had only about one sixth of the land area of this region (756,816/130,000). If we divided the estimate of 5.5 million by six get about 900,000. The state was landlocked and had no port. One might expect the most populous cities in Anatolia to be outside Cappadocia on the coast. A figure of 900,000 would certainly be an upper limit. Three hundred years later, under Emperor Valerian, the province of Cappadocia was reported to have had 400,000.
[2]
This seems a more reasonable figure given Cappadocia’s location. Anatolia at the time of Valerian had about 6.5 million more people
[1]
- 1 million more than in 100 BCE - which means Cappadocia may have had only a sixteenth of the Turkey-in-Asia population. If we apply the same ratio to 100 BCE we get 350,000.
[1]: (McEvedy and Jones 1978, 134) McEvedy, Colin. Jones, Richard. 1978. Atlas of World Population History. Penguin Books Ltd. London.
[2]: (Smith ed. 1869, 469) Smith, William. ed. 1869. Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography, Volume 1. James Walton.
levels. The Cappadocian kingdom had some cities, including the capital Mazaca as well as Tyana, Kybistra and Hanisa
[1]
, but there is a lack of detailed evidence for the size of these cities and their importance in relation to other Cappadocian settlements
[2]
. Without details of settlement size or population, a rough three-level settlement hierarchy can be given to Cappadocia:
1. City - Mazaca, Tyana, Kybistra, Hanisa and possibly Ariaratheia
2. Town - Priene3. Village
[1]: Iossif, P. P and Lorber, C. C. (2010) Hypaithros: A Numismatic Contribution to the Military History of Cappadocia. Historia, Band 59/4, Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart. p432
[2]: Rostovtzeff, M. (1941) The Social and Economic History of the Hellenistic World, Volume 2. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p838
levels. These levels apply to the temple state in Cappadocia, as described by Strabo: “It is a considerable city; its inhabitants, however, consist mostly of ‘divinely inspired’ people and the sacred slaved who live in it. Its inhabitants are Kataonians, who, though in a general way classified as subjects of the king, are in most respects subject to the priest. The priest is master of the temple, and also of the sacred slaved, who, on my sojourn there, were more than six thousand in number, both men and women together. Also, considerable territory belongs to the temple, and the revenue is enjoyed by the priest. He is second in rank in Cappadocia after the king. (12.2.3)”
[1]
1. King
2. Priests, of the temple state, who ruled over the temple servants and were second only to the king
[2]
3. Temple servants4. Sacred slaves (hierodouloi) - the slaves belonged to the temple state (not even the priests could sell them)
[3]
[1]: Potter, D. (2003) Hellenistic Religion. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Hellenistic World. Blackwell: Malden, Oxford, pp 407-430. p424-425
[2]: Sökmen, E. (2009) Characteristics of the Temple States in Pontos. In, Højte, J. M. (ed.) Mithridates VI and the Pontic Kingdom. Aarhus University Press. p279-280
[3]: Sökmen, E. (2009) Characteristics of the Temple States in Pontos. In, Højte, J. M. (ed.) Mithridates VI and the Pontic Kingdom. Aarhus University Press. p280
levels. The military levels have been inferred, based on the military organisation of the Pontic kingdom.
[1]
1. King
2. Supreme military commander (epi tōn dunameōn)/ chief bodyguard (?epi tou egcheiridiou)3. General4. Cavalry5. Infantry
[1]: McGing, B. C. (1986) The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus. Leiden: Brill. p91-3
levels.
In the Cappadocian kingdom, the king was the head of all administrative affairs and he used provincial governors, or strategos, to maintain the kingdom as divided into strategeiae
[1]
[2]
. It is likely that there were administrative levels beneath the strategos, but there is little evidence for them at present.
1. King
_Central government_
2. ?3. ?4. ?
_Provincial government_
2. Strategos3. ?4. ?
[1]: Højte, J. M. (2009) The Administrative Organisation of the Pontic Kingdom. In, Højte, J. M (ed.)Mithridates VI and the Pontic Kingdom. Aarhus University Press. p105
[2]: Ma, J. (2003). Kings. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A companion to the Hellenistic World. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing, pp177-195. p183-184
Based on the temple state in Cappadocia, as described by Strabo: “It is a considerable city; its inhabitants, however, consist mostly of ‘divinely inspired’ people and the sacred slaved who live in it. Its inhabitants are Kataonians, who, though in a general way classified as subjects of the king, are in most respects subject to the priest. The priest is master of the temple, and also of the sacred slaved, who, on my sojourn there, were more than six thousand in number, both men and women together. Also, considerable territory belongs to the temple, and the revenue is enjoyed by the priest. He is second in rank in Cappadocia after the king. (12.2.3)” [1]
[1]: Potter, D. (2003) Hellenistic Religion. In, Erskine, A. (ed.) A Companion to the Hellenistic World. Blackwell: Malden, Oxford, pp 407-430. p424-425
The Cappadocian kings minted their own coins, but there is some disagreement as to how many mints there were and which settlements they were located in. [1]
[1]: Iossif, P. P and Lorber, C. C. (2010) Hypaithros: A Numismatic Contribution to the Military History of Cappadocia. Historia, Band 59/4, Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart. p440
The Cappadocian kings minted their own coins. [1] "Cappadocia is another example of a kingdom which adopted Greek as the language of administration, and whose kings energetically sponsored cultural Hellenism (high literary culture, gymnasion culture; euergetism abroad), to gain acceptance in the international scene." [2]
[1]: Iossif, P. P and Lorber, C. C. (2010) Hypaithros: A Numismatic Contribution to the Military History of Cappadocia. Historia, Band 59/4, Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart. p440
[2]: (Ma, 2003, p188)
“Through Lycaonia [an area granted to Cappadocia after Attalus left his kingdom to Rome], an immense region of infertile steppes and salt desert, there passed the highway that led from the Aegean coast of Asia through the Cilician Gates to Syria and the Euphrates.” [1]
[1]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1977) Roman Involvement in Anatolia, 167-88 B. C. The Journal of Roman Studies. 67, pp. 62-75. p68
Pompeius organisation: “The ineffectual Ariobarzanes was restored yet again to the throne of Cappadocia. He retained the Tomisa bridgehead between Melitene and Sophene on the far bank of the Euphrates, given to him by Lucullus, which controlled the route across the Taurus to southern Armenia…” [1]
[1]: Sherwin-White, A. N. (1984) Roman Foreign Policy in the Near East, 168 BC to AD 1. London: Duckworth. p226
Historical records have survived from the time of the Cappadocian kingdom. Polybius and Strabo were the main historians of the time, and although they did not often discuss Cappadocia directly, they to refer to the region in relation to the expansion of the Roman Empire and the politics of the neighbouring polities. [1]
[1]: Bowder, D. (ed.) (1982) Who was Who in the Greek World, 776 BC - 30 BC. Phaidon: Oxford. p171-172
The only surviving written records about Cappadocia are from the historians writing from outside Cappadocia either at the time of the kingdom or later. [1] Detailed information about the written records of Cappadocia cannot, therefore, be given.
[1]: Bowder, D. (ed.) (1982) Who was Who in the Greek World, 776 BC - 30 BC. Phaidon: Oxford. p171-172, 196
The only surviving written records about Cappadocia are from the historians writing from outside Cappadocia either at the time of the kingdom or later. [1] Detailed information about the written records of Cappadocia cannot, therefore, be given.
[1]: Bowder, D. (ed.) (1982) Who was Who in the Greek World, 776 BC - 30 BC. Phaidon: Oxford. p171-172, 196
The only surviving written records about Cappadocia are from the historians writing from outside Cappadocia either at the time of the kingdom or later. [1] Detailed information about the written records of Cappadocia cannot, therefore, be given.
[1]: Bowder, D. (ed.) (1982) Who was Who in the Greek World, 776 BC - 30 BC. Phaidon: Oxford. p171-172, 196
By government, traders etc.
Bronze coins were cast from the time of the early Cappadocian dynasts. [1] [2]
[1]: Iossif, P. P and Lorber, C. C. (2010) Hypaithros: A Numismatic Contribution to the Military History of Cappadocia. Historia, Band 59/4, Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart.
[2]: Simonetta, B. (1977) The Coins of the Cappadocian Kings. Fribourg: Office du Livre.
“Assuming that hypaithrou and Tyana also designate intended users, the coins attest to a disposition of troops both in Tyana’s famous fortress and outside the city in a strategic encampment.” [1]
[1]: Iossif, P. P and Lorber, C. C. (2010) Hypaithros: A Numismatic Contribution to the Military History of Cappadocia. Historia, Band 59/4, Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart. p445
Inferred, based on presence in the contemporary Pontic kingdom. [1] [2]
[1]: McGing, B. C. (1986) The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus. Leiden: Brill.
[2]: Erciyas, D. B. (2006) Wealth, Aristocracy and Royal Propaganda under the Hellenistic Kingdom of the Mithradatids. Colloquia Pontica: Brill, Leiden, Boston.
Many ancient armies used slingers. Vulnerable to counter-attacks, slinger units were usually small and used at the start of the battle. Because of the training required to produce and effective slinger they were often hired mercenaries. [1] “Inscribed sling bullets provide a better parallel to the coinage we are studying. Sling bullets are often inscribed with a personal name, either in the nominative or in the genitive.” [2]
[1]: (Gabriel 2002, 31) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
[2]: Iossif, P. P and Lorber, C. C. (2010) Hypaithros: A Numismatic Contribution to the Military History of Cappadocia. Historia, Band 59/4, Franz Steiner Verlag, Stuttgart. p444
Inferred, based on the presence of the bow in the contemporary Pontic kingdom. [1] "Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders." [2] Bows were used by the Greeks and Romans but they didn’t place much emphasis on the bow as a weapon preferring instead infantry combat. [3]
[1]: McGing, B. C. (1986) The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus. Leiden: Brill. p95
[2]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018.
[3]: (Gabriel 2002, 29) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
Likely in some form?: "the hand-held crossbow was invented by the Chinese, in the fifth century BC, and probably came into the Roman world in the first century AD, where it was used for hunting." [1] The crossbow also developed after the Syracuse Greek Dionysios I invented a form of crossbow called the gastraphetes in 399 BCE. [2]
[1]: (Nicholson 2004, 99) Helen Nicholson. 2004. Medieval Warfare: Theory and Practice of War in Europe, 300-1500. PalgraveMacmillan. Basingstoke.
[2]: (Keyser and Irby-Massie 2006, 260) Paul T Keyser. Georgia Irby-Massie. Science, Medicine, And Technology. Glenn R Bugh. ed. 2006. The Cambridge Companion to the Hellenistic World. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
"Composite bows are known from both Mesopotamia and the Great Steppe from the III millennium BCE. The Scythian bow was different from the Mesopotamian one primarily in its overall dimensions - it was smaller so that it could be used from the horseback. At the same time, self bows were also in use, but because of their large size they were not suitable for use by horse riders." [1] Bows were used by the Greeks and Romans but they didn’t place much emphasis on the bow as a weapon preferring instead infantry combat. [2]
[1]: Sergey A Nefedov, RAN Institute of History and Archaeology, Yekaterinburg, Russia. Personal Communication to Peter Turchin. January 2018.
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 29) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
Inferred, based on the presence of swords in the contemporary Pontic kingdom [1] , and the battles which Cappadocia fought in. "All armies after the seventeenth century B.C.E. carried the sword, but in none was it a major weapon of close combat; rather, it was used when the soldier’s primary weapons, the spear and axe, were lost or broken." [2]
[1]: McGing, B. C. (1986) The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus. Leiden: Brill.
[2]: (Gabriel 2002, 26-27) Richard A Gabriel. 2002. The Great Armies of Antiquity. Praeger. Westport.
Inferred, based on presence in the contemporary Pontic kingdom. [1] [2]
[1]: McGing, B. C. (1986) The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus. Leiden: Brill.
[2]: Erciyas, D. B. (2006) Wealth, Aristocracy and Royal Propaganda under the Hellenistic Kingdom of the Mithradatids. Colloquia Pontica: Brill, Leiden, Boston.
By the time of ’Etruscan Rome’ (400 BCE?) - here I believe the author is referring to ancient armies in general - "bronze greaves to protect the shins and forearms of the soldier were standard items of military equipment." [1]
[1]: (Gabriel and Metz 1991, 51) Richard A Gabriel. Karen S Metz. 1991. The Military Capabilities of Ancient Armies. Greenwood Press. Westport.
Inferred, based on presence in the contemporary Pontic kingdom. [1] [2]
[1]: McGing, B. C. (1986) The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus. Leiden: Brill.
[2]: Erciyas, D. B. (2006) Wealth, Aristocracy and Royal Propaganda under the Hellenistic Kingdom of the Mithradatids. Colloquia Pontica: Brill, Leiden, Boston.
Possible. Already introduced by the Assyrians.
Inferred, based on presence in the contemporary Pontic kingdom. [1] [2]
[1]: McGing, B. C. (1986) The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus. Leiden: Brill.
[2]: Erciyas, D. B. (2006) Wealth, Aristocracy and Royal Propaganda under the Hellenistic Kingdom of the Mithradatids. Colloquia Pontica: Brill, Leiden, Boston.
Inferred, based on presence in the contemporary Pontic kingdom. [1] [2]
[1]: McGing, B. C. (1986) The foreign policy of Mithridates VI Eupator, King of Pontus. Leiden: Brill.
[2]: Erciyas, D. B. (2006) Wealth, Aristocracy and Royal Propaganda under the Hellenistic Kingdom of the Mithradatids. Colloquia Pontica: Brill, Leiden, Boston.
Inferred, as Cappadocia is landlocked.
Inferred, as Cappadocia is landlocked.
Inferred, as Cappadocia is landlocked.