hide Sorting

You can sort these results in two ways:

By entity
Chronological order for dates, alphabetical order for places and people.
By position (current method)
As the entities appear in the document.

You are currently sorting in ascending order. Sort in descending order.

hide Most Frequent Entities

The entities that appear most frequently in this document are shown below.

Entity Max. Freq Min. Freq
43 BC 170 170 Browse Search
44 BC 146 146 Browse Search
49 BC 140 140 Browse Search
45 BC 124 124 Browse Search
54 BC 121 121 Browse Search
46 BC 119 119 Browse Search
63 BC 109 109 Browse Search
48 BC 106 106 Browse Search
69 AD 95 95 Browse Search
59 BC 90 90 Browse Search
View all entities in this document...

Browsing named entities in a specific section of A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology (ed. William Smith). Search the whole document.

Found 13 total hits in 13 results.

1 2
their hands, and the war would have been terminated at once: but Lucullus was faithful to the party interests of Sulla rather than to those of Rome : he refused to come with his fleet to the support of Fimbria, and Mithridates made his escape by sea to Mytilene. Shortly afterwards Lucullus defeated the hostile fleet under Neoptolemus off the island of Tenedos; and thus made himself master of the Hellespont, where he rejoined Sulla, and facilitated his passage into Asia the following spring, B. C. 84. (Plut. Luc. 2-4 4, Sull. 11; Appian, App. Mith. 33, 51, 52, 56, Oros. 6.2.) Peace with Mithridates followed shortly after, and Sulla hastened to return to Rome. It was a fortunate circumstance for Lucullus that he did not accompany his leader at this time, being left behind in the charge of various public duties in Asia, by which means he escaped all participation in the of scenes of horror that ensued, at the same time that he retained the high place he already enjoyed in the favour of
it was set on fire by Callimachus himself previous to evacuating the place; and though Lucullus did his utmost to extinguish the flames, his soldiers were too intent upon plunder to second his exertions, and the greater part of the town was consumed. He, however, endeavoured to repatr the damage as far as possible, by granting freedom to the city, and inviting new settlers by extensive privileges. Heracleia, which was still besieged by Cotta, did not fall apparently till the following year, B. C. 71; and the capture of Sinope by Luculllus himself, shortly afterwards, completed the conquest of the whole kingdom of Pontus. About the same time also Machares, the son of Mithridates, who had been appointed by his father king of Bosporus, sent to make offers of submission to the Roman general, and even assisted him with ships and supplies in effecting the reduction of Sinope. (Plut. Luc. 19, 23, 24; Appian, App. Mith. 82, 83; Memnon. 45, 47-54; Strab. xii. p.546, 547; Sall. Hist. ii. fr. 28,
the two cities, and remained quiet at Cabeira, where he had established his winter-quarters, and had assembled a force of 40,000 foot and 4000 horse. Lucullus at first pressed the siege of Amisus with the utmost vigour; but it was defended with equal energy and ability by Callimachus, the commander of the garrison; and after a time the efforts of both parties gradually relaxed, and the siege was protracted throughout the whole winter without any decisive result. With the approach of spring (B. C. 72) Lucullus broke up his camp; and leaving Murena with two legions to continue the siege of Amisus, led the rest of his forces against Mithridates, who was still at Cabeira. But the king was superior in cavalry, and Lucullus was therefore unwilling to risk a general action in the plain. Several partial engagements ensued, in which the Romans were more than once worsted; and Lucullus began to find himself in distress for provisions, which he was compelled to bring from Cappadocia. A series of
Lucullus 4. L. Licinius Lucullus, L. F. L. N., celebrated as the conqueror of Mithridates, and by much the most illustrious of his family. He was the son of the preceding and of Caecilia, the daughter of L. Metellus Calvus. (Plut. Luc. 1.) [CAECILIA, No. 3.] We have no express mention of the period of his birth or of his age, but Plutarch tells us that he was older than Pompey (Lucull. 36, Pomp. 31); he must therefore have been born before B. C. 106, probably at least as early as 109 or 110, since his younger brother Marcus was old enough to be curule aedile in 79. [See No. 6.] His first appearance in public life was as the accuser of the augur Servilius, who had procured the banishment of his father. but had in his turn laid himself open to a criminal charge. This species of retaliation was looked upon with much favour at Rome; and although the trial, after giving rise to scenes of violence and even bloodshed, at length terminated in the acquittal of Servilius, the part which the y
ll as by the whole aristocratical party at Rome, who were alarmed at the increasing power of Pompey, and sought in Lucullus a rival and antagonist to the object of their fears. But his character was ill adapted for the turbulent times in which he lived; and, instead of putting himself prominently forward as the leader of a party he soon began to withdraw gradually from public affairs, and devote himself more and more to a life of indolence and luxury. After the return of Pompey, however, in B. C. 62, he took a leading part, together with Metellus Creticus, Cato, and others of the aristocratic party, in opposing the indiscriminate ratification of the acts of Pompey in Asia. By their combined efforts they succeeded in delaying the proposed measure for more than two years, but at the same time produced the effect, which they had doubtless not anticipated, of forcing Pompey into the arms of the opposite faction, and thus bringing about the coalition known as the First Triumvirate. (Plut. L
proclamations to his soldiers, announcing to them that their general was superseded, and releasing them from their obedience. Mithridates meanwhile ably availed himself of this position of affairs, and Lucullus had the mortification of seeing Pontus and Cappadocia occupied by the enemy before his eyes, and the results of all his previous campaigns apparently annihilated, without being able to stir a step in their defence. But it was still more galling to his feelings when, in the spring of B. C. 66, he was called upon to resign the command to his old rival Pompey, who had been appointed by the Manilian law to supersede both him and Glabrio. (Plut. Luc. 33-35; Appian, App. Mith. 88-91; D. C. 35.8-10, 12-17; Cic. p. Leg. Manil. 2, 5, 9, Ep. ad Att. 13.6; Eutrop. 6.11.) The friends of the two generals succeeded in bringing about an interview between them before Lucullus quitted his government; but though the meeting was at first friendly, it ended in bickerings and disputes, which only a
cile this with the details of the campaigns as given by Appian and Plutarch. Appius Claudius, who had been sent by Lucullus to Tigranes, to demand the surrender of Mithridates, had returned with an unfavourable answer: intelligence had been also received that the two kings, laying aside all personal differ. ences, were assembling large forces and preparing for immediate hostilities; and Lucullus now determined to anticipate them by invading the dominions of Tigranes. It was in the spring of B. C. 69, that he set out on his march towards Armenia, with a select body of 12,000 foot and 3000 horse, leaving his lieutenant Sornatius to command in Pontus (where every thing seemed now perfectly settled) during his absence. Ariobarzanes furnished him assistance on his march through Cappadocia, and the passage of the Euphrates was facilitated by an accidental drought, which was hailed as a good omen both by the general and his soldiers. From thence lie advanced through the district of Sophene, a
scenes of violence and even bloodshed, at length terminated in the acquittal of Servilius, the part which the young Lucullus had taken in the matter appears to have added greatly to his credit and reputation. (Plut. Luc. 1; Cic. Acad. pr. 2.1.) While yet quite a young man, he served with distinction in the Marsic or Social War; and at this time attracted the attention of Sulla, whom he afterwards accompanied as his quaestor into Greece and Asia on the breaking out of the Mithridatic war, B. C. 88. During the prolonged siege of Athens, Sulla found himself labouring under the greatest disadvantage from the want of a fleet, and of he in consequence despatched Lucullus in the middle of winter (B. C. 87-86), with a squadron of only six ships, to endeavour to collect assistance from the allies of Rome. With considerable difficulty he raised a fleet, and expelled the forces of the king from Chios and Colophon. These operations extended far on into the summer of 85 : meanwhile, Fimbria, who
lut. Luc. 1; Cic. Acad. pr. 2.1.) While yet quite a young man, he served with distinction in the Marsic or Social War; and at this time attracted the attention of Sulla, whom he afterwards accompanied as his quaestor into Greece and Asia on the breaking out of the Mithridatic war, B. C. 88. During the prolonged siege of Athens, Sulla found himself labouring under the greatest disadvantage from the want of a fleet, and of he in consequence despatched Lucullus in the middle of winter (B. C. 87-86), with a squadron of only six ships, to endeavour to collect assistance from the allies of Rome. With considerable difficulty he raised a fleet, and expelled the forces of the king from Chios and Colophon. These operations extended far on into the summer of 85 : meanwhile, Fimbria, who had assumed the command of the army in Asia, which had been sent out by the Marian party at Rome, had expelled Mithridates from Pergamus, and was besieging him in Pitane, where he had taken refuge. Had Lucullus
against the life of Pompey (Cic. in Vatin. 10, Ep. ad Att. 2.24); and in the same year he is mentioned among the judges at the trial of L. Flaccus (Cic. pro Flacc. 34). But these two are the last occasions on which his name appears in history. The precise period of his death is not mentioned, but he cannot long have survived the return of Cicero from exile, as the great orator refers to him as no longer living, in his oration concerning the consular provinces, delivered the following year, B. C. 56 (Cic. de Prov. Cons. 9). We are told that for some time previous to his death he had fallen into a state of complete dotage, so that the management of his affairs was confided to his brother Marcus (Plut. Luc. 43; Aur Vict. de Vir. Illustr. 74). But his death, as often happens, revived in its full force the memory of his great exploits; and when the funeral oration was pronounced in the forum over his remains, the populace insisted that he should be buried, as Sulla had been, in the Campus
1 2