06-03-2010, 01:47 AM
Ha! We’ll likely not agree on the force across the Danube. Arrian actually states that “the Getae did not sustain even the first charge of the cavalry” and that “terrible to them also was the closely-locked order of the phalanx, and violent the charge of the cavalry.” This all suggests to me that they didn’t contest the cavalry charge or the infantry: they broke as Alexander set after them. As Rahae notes in his paper: horse won’t charge an immovable shield wall of infantry; they will destroy those who do not stand their ground and break in fear.
Arrian never fails to note the participation of the Agrianes (who were on this campaign) and they are thus notable by their absence.
Diodorus has almost certainly found the usage of this word in his source. As a rule he does not change such words preferring to elaborate his moralistic themes or add a moralistic colour (most particularly on the outrageous turns of tyche and the just or otherwise nature of man and laws). The description of the hypaspists as “spearmen” will have been a Greek city state “slur” on Philip: tyrants and despots are the regular employers of such squads of doruphoron.
Hammond, in his Philip of Macedon, summarises his quellenfoschung on Diodorus 16. The Greek narrative (from about the Social War on if I remember) he cogently argues was based on an Athenian source (Dyillus) as it is strongly pro-Athenian and, as such, writes from the city state perspective. Such a source is most likely to have seen Philip as the destroyer of city state autonomy and to present him as the tyrannos replete with his “gunmen” for escort.
Your points about the availability of mercenaries are well taken. I doubt exactly how much money Philip nay have had but the old standby of plunder will have been useful. I see the army that Philip took to confront Bardyliss as a core of his own infantry – his ‘pezhetairoi’, the “flower” or “picked men” – as well as a levy of Macedonian traditional “peltasts”, his cavalry and those mercenaries he could hire.
You are dead right concerning Crenides: this was vital insofar as Philip was able to afford some form of “standing army”. He needed it as Macedonia was in no way stable on any front.
Arrian never fails to note the participation of the Agrianes (who were on this campaign) and they are thus notable by their absence.
Quote:I would propose that the hypaspists (I agree that this more common term is preferable, though I would point out in defense of Diodorus' alternate terminology that he is closer to being a contempory of Alexander than our other surviving sources) likely grew from a small base of professional bodyguards that Philip had retained prior to his becoming king (Parke in Greek Mercenary Soldiers, cites an ancedote from Carystius to suggest this contingent dated from at least 364).
Diodorus has almost certainly found the usage of this word in his source. As a rule he does not change such words preferring to elaborate his moralistic themes or add a moralistic colour (most particularly on the outrageous turns of tyche and the just or otherwise nature of man and laws). The description of the hypaspists as “spearmen” will have been a Greek city state “slur” on Philip: tyrants and despots are the regular employers of such squads of doruphoron.
Hammond, in his Philip of Macedon, summarises his quellenfoschung on Diodorus 16. The Greek narrative (from about the Social War on if I remember) he cogently argues was based on an Athenian source (Dyillus) as it is strongly pro-Athenian and, as such, writes from the city state perspective. Such a source is most likely to have seen Philip as the destroyer of city state autonomy and to present him as the tyrannos replete with his “gunmen” for escort.
Your points about the availability of mercenaries are well taken. I doubt exactly how much money Philip nay have had but the old standby of plunder will have been useful. I see the army that Philip took to confront Bardyliss as a core of his own infantry – his ‘pezhetairoi’, the “flower” or “picked men” – as well as a levy of Macedonian traditional “peltasts”, his cavalry and those mercenaries he could hire.
You are dead right concerning Crenides: this was vital insofar as Philip was able to afford some form of “standing army”. He needed it as Macedonia was in no way stable on any front.
Paralus|Michael Park
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους
Wicked men, you are sinning against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander!
Academia.edu
Ἐπὶ τοὺς πατέρας, ὦ κακαὶ κεφαλαί, τοὺς μετὰ Φιλίππου καὶ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὰ ὅλα κατειργασμένους
Wicked men, you are sinning against your fathers, who conquered the whole world under Philip and Alexander!
Academia.edu
