THE ARMY OP ALEXANDER THE GREAT %/ ROBERT LOCK IT'-'-i""*'?.} Submitted to satisfy the requirements for the degree of Ph.D. in the School of History in the University of Leeds. Supervisor: Professor E. Badian Date of Submission: Thursday 14 March 1974 IMAGING SERVICES NORTH X 5 Boston Spa, Wetherby </l *xj 1 West Yorkshire, LS23 7BQ. * $ www.bl.uk BEST COPY AVAILABLE. TEXT IN ORIGINAL IS CLOSE TO THE EDGE OF THE PAGE ABSTRACT The army with which Alexander the Great conquered the Persian empire was "built around the Macedonian Companion cavalry and the Macedonian heavy infantry. The Macedonian nobility were traditionally fine horsemen, hut the infantry was poorly armed and badly organised until the reign of Alexander II in 369/8 B.C. This king formed a small royal standing army; it consisted of a cavalry force of Macedonian nobles, which he named the 'hetairoi' (or Companion]! cavalry, and an infantry body drawn from the commoners and trained to fight in phalangite formation: these he called the »pezetairoi» (or foot-companions). Philip II (359-336 B.C.) expanded the kingdom and greatly increased the manpower resources for war. Towards the end of his reign he started preparations for the invasion of the Persian empire and levied many more Macedonians than had hitherto been involved in the king's wars. In order to attach these men more closely to himself he extended the meaning of the terms »hetairol» and 'pezetairoi to refer to the whole bodies of Macedonian cavalry and heavy infantry which served under him on his campaigning. In addition to these bodies, he formed an elite infantry force of Macedonians, distinct from the regular levy, and named them 'hypaspists*. Philip was killed as he was about to begin the invasion of Asia and his son inherited the army and the expedition. During the early years of the Asian campaign, which was begun in 334 B.C., Alexander made few changes in the structure of the army: the Companion cavalry was organised into seven territorial squadrons and a royal guard, all under a single commander; the foot-Gompanions consisted of six territorial "battalions, organised together with the Greek hoplites under an overall commander; the hypaspists also were grouped together into one command. One "battalion was added to the foot-Companions in 331 B.C. "but there was no major reorganisation until'the hard fighting against the scattered tribes of Iran was encountered. Then, faced "by a different style of opposition, Alexander adopted a more flexible structure. In 330 B.C. the overall commander of the pezetairoi was removed and the battalions became fully independent command units: later in the same year the commander of the hypaspists died and was not replaced; the Companion cavalry also lost its commander in this year and was divided into two independent parts. In the winter of 328/7 B.C., in preparation for the Indian campaign, the Companion cavalry was further divided to form six independent commands in addition to the royal guard. No Macedonian reinforcements were received by Alexander after the end of 331 B.C., until his return from India in 324 B.C. Buring this time the strength of the pezetairoi was maintained by reinforcements of Greek mercenaries, and from 328/7 B.C. Iranian cavalry was introduced to the Companion cavalry to reinforce the strength of that body. In the final year of his life, after his return from India, Alexander set about establishing the structure of the imperial armies. He discharged many veterans and received fresh troops from Macedonia and his subjects in the Persian empire. Many of these forces he dispatched for service under satraps and garrison commanders, but he maintained a large main army directly under his command and prepared for a major expedition into Arabia. At the core of the cavalry was the Companion cavalry consisting of Macedonian and Iranian nobility: the nucleus of the infantry was the Macedonian hypaspists and pezetairoi and beside them were ranged Iranian guards, called *melophoroi*, and Iranian archers. The political relationship between Alexander and his Macedonian soldiers was of the most primitive nature. The Macedonian commoners had no background of political involve­ ment and had no consciousness of defined roles for themselves or their king. On the Asian campaign they were intimately involved in the king*s policies and their opinions influenced the conduct of affairs, but they showed no sign of being aware of their role and their powers as a political body. CONTENTS Pages Introduction 1 Chapter I The Macedonian army until the accession of Philip II 2-28 Chapter II The army of Philip II 29-56 Part I Increase of manpower 29-36 Part II Organisation of the Macedonian troops (a) The cavalry 36-47 (b) The infantry 47-56 Chapter III The Companion cavalry of Alexander 554-524 B.C. 57-93 Part I The Reform of 331 B.C.57-67 Part II The hipparchs and hipparchies 68-83 Part III Reinforcements and losses 84-90 Part IV Changes during the Indian campaign 91-93 Chapter IY Macedonian heavy infantry 334-324 B.C. 94-157 Part I The pezetairoi (a) The number and commanders of battalions 95-121 (1) Internal organisation 122-129 (c) Reinforcements and losses 130-138 (¿0 Conclusion 138-139 Part II The hypaspists (a) To the reform of 331 B.C. 140-146 (1) Prom the reform of 331 B.C. to 324 B.C. 146-156 Pages Chapter V The army 324/3 B.C. 157-199 Part I Discharge and reinforcement of troops 157-161 Part II Troops for service in the satrapies 162-164 Part III The main army 165-193 Part IV The position of Hephaestion in 324 B.C. 193-199 Chapter VI The Macedonian army and politics 200-238 Part I The theory of the Macedonian state 201-215 Part II The men-in-arms and politics in Alexanders reign 216-238 Bibliography 239-247 i Notes to Chapters I < M 248-327 Appendices Appendix I Theopompus and the hetairoi of Philip 329-342 Appendix II Alexander’s army at the beginning of the campaign 343-370 (a) The transmitted totals 343-357 (b) Diodorus 17,17,3f. 358-370 Appendix III Arrian’s terminology 371-396 (a) Military terminology 371-390 (b) Hetairos 391-396 Appendix IV Iranians in the Companion cavalry 397-420 Appendix V losses in Gedrosia 421-431 Pages Appendix VI The argyraspids 4 32 -4 42 Notes to appendices 443-473 INTRODUCTION There has been no full study of Alexander's expeditionary army since the monumentai work of Berve was published in 1926. Much of his work has found general acceptance and can hardly he improved upon, hut his conclusions concerning the Macedonian element in the army have been challenged, notably by Tarn. The question of the organisation and attitudes of these Macedonians is far from settled, but no accurate assess­ ment of Alexander as general and statesman is possible until the nature of his army is understood; and at the heart of the army were the Macedonians. In this thesis I intend to review the evidence on the Macedonian units, taking advantage of recent research on the sources to offer fresh interpretations of much discussed passages, in the hope of making some contribution to the better understanding of Alexander and his achievement. 2 CHAPTER I THE MACEDONIAN ARMY UNTIL THE ACCESSION OF PHILIP II It is generally-recognised that the army which Alexander took with him to Asia in 334 B.C. was essentially the creation of his father, Philip. Little attention, however, has been given to the development of the armed forces of the Argead kingsiprior to Philip: yet this is a necessary background to an understanding of Philip*s army, and, therefore, of that of Alexander. It is desirable to begin this study with a discussion of the little evidence that exists concerning the army prior to Philip’s accession. 3 The first reference to Macedonian troops occurs in the context of the Persian invasion of 4-80/79 B.C., where Herodotus (8,35) says that Macedonian troops garrisoned Boeotian cities when Xerxes moved through to Athens. No details, however, are recorded and the first evidence of any importance refers to the year 429 B.C., when Sitalces, king of the Thracians, invaded Macedonia. Thucydides (2,98-101) describes how Sitalces, with 150,000 men, a third of them cavalry (98,4), swept over Crestonia, Mygdonia and Anthemous, meeting with little resistance (100). Some of the Thracian troops were good (98,4) and the Macedonians could not stand against them. The Macedonian infantry did not even join battle but, Thucydides tells us, the cavalry,-which was of good quality and wore breastplates, put up a good fight, although greatly outnumbered. They soon gave up, however, and Sitalces and the Macedonian king, Perdiccas, came,to an agree­ ment. Six years later a Macedonian force, with. Spartan and Chalcidian support, invaded Lyncestis. Thucydides (4,124,1) records the content of the army. Under Perdiccas were his subject Macedonians and the hoplite force of Greeks resident in his kingdom: under Brasidas were Peloponnesians, Acanthians and other Chalcidians. In all there were about 3,000 hoplites, a little less than 1,000 cavalry, consisting of Macedonians and Chalcidians, and a great mass of barbarians in addition to these. After one small battle between the cavalry and hoplites of each side (4,124,3), the Macedonians heard that the Illyrians had joined Arrhabaeus and they withdrew, leaving 4 Brasidas and, his forces in the lurch. Taking these two passages together, it is possible to arrive at some idea of the composition of the Macedonian army.