The "Fred thread": the Argead Macedonian Army

[Old Husker]

I certainly agree with your comments on Diodorus, both in general and as to Hieronymus' work, since I also suspect that the Sicilian was either using an intermediate (error filled) source or (at times) heavily embroidering the truth with what Delbruck called "guard room" stories (though, not nearly to the extent that Plutarch used such tall tales - that otherwise marvelous writer seems to have rarely met an anecdote that he didn't like, no matter how wild). Also, Sean's suggestion about using English terminology sounds like a good idea to me, a way to reduce confusion (and irritation) where there is a fundamental disagreement over what the Greek terms actually denote/connote. Of course, that doesn't mean that a little friendly friction over differing beliefs will just go away, since I suspect that our various assumptions about the mysterious hypaspists will never coincide. Nor, indeed, should they; after all, the ability to look at the fragmentary ancient record and offer different and creative speculations is one of the things that makes working in this area so interesting. If the data was all that clear and conclusive, it simply wouldn't be much fun! - Regards all, Fred (P.S. I'll go back and take a fresh look at Ueda-Sarson, Sean, as per your recommendation)