2. Son of Pharnaces, succeeded his father as satrap of the Persian provinces near the Hellespont, and it would seem from a passage in Thucydides (8.58) that his brothers were associated with him in the government (comp. Arnold and Göller ad Thuc. l.c. ; Krueger, ad Tlnw. 8.6). Early in B. C. 412, being anxious to support the Greek cities of his satrapy in their intended revolt from Athens, in order that he might satisfy the demand of his master, Dareius II., for the tribute arising from them, he sent to Sparta two Greek exiles who had taken refuge at his court (Calligeitus of Megara and Timagoras of Cyzicus), proposing an alliance, and urging that a Lacedaemonian fleet should be despatched to the Hellespont. The government, however, acting chiefly under the influence of Alcibiades, decided in favour of a counter application to the same effect from Tissaphernes, the satrap of Lydia; but, in the congress which the Spartans shortly after held at Corinth, it was resolved to send aid to the Hellespont after Chios and Lesbos should be won from Athens, and, in the same year, a squadron of twenty-seven ships, which had been prepared for this service, was despatched with orders to proceed under Clearchus to co-operate with Pharnabazus, if it should seem fit to the Spartan commissioners who were sent out at the same time to inquire into the conduct of Astyochus (Thuc. 8.6, 8, 39). Nothing, however, appears to have been attempted by the Lacedaemonians in this quarter till the spring of 411, when DERCYLLIDAS marched thither, and, being joined by Pharnabazus, gained possession of Abvdus, and, for a time, of Lampsacus. In the following summer, as Pharnabazus promised to maintain any force which might come to his aid, and the supplies from Tissaphernes were more grudgingly and scantily furnished, the Spartans sent forty ships under Clearchus to the Hellespont, of which ten only arrived there; but, the same motives still continuing to operate with them, and the duplicity of Tissaphernes becoming more and more apparent, the whole armament under Mindarus soon after left Miletus and sailed northward to unite itself with Pharnabazus (Thuc. 8.61, 62, 80, 99-109). In the battle between the Athenian and Lacedaemonian fleets, which was fought near Abydus in the same year (B. C. 411), and in which the Athenians were viotorious, Pharnabazus distinguished himself greatly by his zeal in behalf of his allies, urging his horse into the sea, and fighting as long as possible (Xen. Hel. 1.1.6; Diod. 13.46; Plut. Alc. 27). In B. C. 410 he aided Mindarus in the capture of Cyzicus; and in the battle which took place there soon after [MINDARUS], he not only gave valuable assistance to the Lacedaemonians with his forces, which were drawn up on the shore, but, when fortune declared against his friends, he checked the pursuit of the victorious Athenians, and sheltered the fugitives in his camp. He also supplied each of them with arms and clothing and with pay for two months, setting then to guard the coasts of his province, and bidding them take courage, as there was plenty of timber in the king's country to build them another fleet. For this purpose he furnished them himself with money and materials, and enabled them to set about the construction of new ships at Antandrus. He then prepared to march to the help of Chalcedon, which seemed to be in danger from the Athenian fleet under Alcibiades ; but it is probable that the return of the latter to the Hellespont induced Pharinabazus to relinquish his intention and to remain where his presence appeared more necessary. It was about this time also that IIermocrates was indebted to his generosity for an unsolicited supply of money for the purpose of procuring ships and mercenaries to effect his return to Syracuse [HERMOCRATES]. In B. C. 409, Pharnabazus was defeated by Alcibiades and Thrasyllus near Abydus, and his province was ravaged by the Athenians (Xen. Hell. 1.1. §§ 14, &c., 31, 2. §§ 16, 17; Diod. 13.49-51, 63; Plnt. Alc. 28.) In B. C. 408, the success of Alcibiades and his colleagues at Chalcedon against Pharnabazus and the Spartan harmost, Hippocrates, who was slain in the battle, induced the satrap to accept terms of accommodation fiom the Athenians, and he further engaged to give a safe conduct to the ambassadors whom they purposed sending to Dareius (Xen. Hell. 1.3. §§ 4-14; Diod. 13.66 ; Plut. Alc. 30, 31.) Early in the following spring he was journeying with the embassy in question on their way to the Persian court, when they were met by some Spartan envoys returning from Susa, where they had obtained from the king all they wished, and closely followed by Cyrns, who had been invested by his father with the government of the whole sea-coast of Asia Minor, and had been commissioned to aid the Lacedaemonians in the war. At the desire of the prince, Pharnabazus detained the Athenian ambassadors in custody, and three years elapsed before he could obtain leave to dismiss then (Xen. Hell. 1.4. §§ 1-7). According to Diodorus (14.22) it was he who gave information to Artaxerxes of the designs of Cyrus ; but the name of Pharnabazus may be a mistake of the author for Tissaphernes in this passage as it certainly is in other parts of his work, e. g. 13.36, 37, 38. When the Ten Thousand Greeks, in their retreat, had reached Calpe in Bithynia, Pharnabazus sent a body of cavalry to act against them, and these troops made an ineffectual attempt to check the progress of their march. (Xen. Anab. 6.4. §§ 24, &c., 5. §§ 26-32.) On their arrival at Chrysopolis, on the eastern shore of the Bosporus, the satrap induced Anaxibius by large promises, which he never redeemed, to withdraw them front his territory. [ANAXIBIUS.] The great authority with which Tissaphernes was invested by Artaxerxes in Asia Minor, as a reward for his services in the war with Cyrus, naturally excited the jealousy of Pharnabazus; and the hostile feeling mutually entertained by the satraps was taken advantage of by Dercyllidas, when he passed over into Asia, in B. C. 399, to protect the Asiatic Greeks against the Persian power. [DERCYLLIDAS.] In B. C. 396, the province of Pharnabazus was invaded by Agesilaus, but the Lacedaemonian cavalry was defeated by that of the satrap. In 395, Tithraustes, who had been sent lv Artaxerxes to put Tissaphernes to death, and to succeed him in his government, made a merit with Agesilaus of his predecessor's execution, and urged him to leave his province unmolested, and to attack that of Pharnabazus instead, a request to which Agesilaus acceded, on condition that Tithraustes should bear the expense of the nmrch. Pharnabazus met the enemy, and gained a slight advantage over one of their imarauding parties; but a few days after this his camp was surprised and captured by Herippidas, and he was himself obliged to wander, a hunted fugitive, about his own territory, until at length a conference was arranged between him and Agesilaus by a friend of both parties, Apollophnnes of Cyzicus. Xenophon gives us a graphic account of the interview, in which the satrap upbraided the Lacedaemonians with the in return they were making him for his services in the Pcloponnesian war, and which ended with a promise fronl Agesilaus to withdraw ; from his territory, and to refrain from any future invasion of it, as long as there should be any one else for him to fight with. (Xen. Hell. 3.4. §§ 12, &c., 25, &c., 4.1. §§ 1, 15-41; Plut. Ages. 9_12; Diod. 14.35, 79, 80; Just. 6.1.) Meanwhile, as early apparently as as. B. C. 397, Pharnabazus had connected himself with Conon, and we find them engaged together down to 393 in a series of successful operations under the sanction and with the assistance of the Persian king. [CONON.] Pharnabazus, in the last-mentioned year, returned to Asia, and we have no further account of him for some time. His satrapy was invaded by Anaxibius in 389, but it does not appear whether he was himself residing there. (Xen. Hell. 4.8.33.) Two years after we find Ariobarzanes holding the government of Pharnabazus, who had gone up to court to marry the king's daughter. (Xen. Hell. 5.1.28, Ages. 3.3 ; Plut. Art. 27.) So far we are on sure ground ; but it is very difficult to decide to what period we should refer the unsuccessful expedition of the Persians to Egypt under Pharnabazus, Abrocomas, and Tithraustes. Rehldantz, however, gives some very probable reasons for placing it in B. C. 392-390. (Rehdantz, Vit. Iph., Chabr., Timoth. pp. 32, 239-242; comp. Isocr. Paneg. 69, d. ; Aristoph. Pl. 178; Just. 6.6.) In B. C. 377, Pharnabazus, by his remonstrances with the Athenians, obtained the recall of Chabrias from the service of Acoris, king of Egypt, and also a promise to send Iphicrates to co-operate with the Persian generals in the reduction of the rebellious province. The expedition, however, under Iphicrates and Pharnabazus ultimately failed iln B. C. 374, chiefly through the dilatory proceedings and the excessive caution of the latter, who excused himself to his colleague by the remark that while his words were in his own power, his actions were in that of the king. [CHABRIAS; IPHICRATES ; NECTANABIS.] Whether the disastrous result of the expedition in question threw Pharnabazus into disgrace at court, we do not know. Henceforth he disappears from history.

The character of Pharnabazus is eminently distinguished by generosity and openness. Throughout a long career, the servant as he was of a corrupt and exacting court, and beset by unscrupulous opponents, we still find him unstained by bad faith, if we except his breach of promise to Anaxibius, the very doubtful case of the murder of ALCIBIADES, and his conduct above-mentioned to the Athenian ambassadors, in which he appears to have been hardly a free agent.