The "Fred thread": the Argead Macedonian Army

[Paullus Scipio]

That, I’d argue, is incorrect. At 18.59.3 they are dcribed as “about 3,000” (arguraspides Makedones, ontes peri trischilious) and at 19.30.6 “at this time only / just 3,000” (tote trischilioi men ontes). The key passage is 19.28.1 referred to by Paul Mac above:

…the Macedonian Silver Shields, more than three thousand in number… / hoi Makedones arguraspides, ontes men pleious trischiliôn…


Now the Loeb follows the Vogel-Fischer, Leipzig (Teubner). It almost always follows the Parisinus graecus codex and the other manuscript, the Florentinus Laurentianus, disagrees here (as elsewhere). The above passage in the Loeb omits the negative “ou” prior to “pleious trischiliôn”. Restored that clearly states “not more that 3,000” and coheres with the other references to their numbers in the text

Well, as to which text, you 'pays yer money and takes yer choice' - which is not say that the Loeb, which presumably follows the text/manuscript the translator thought more reliable, is wrong. Perhaps we can agree '3,000 Argyraspides, give or take a few....' :lol: :lol:

A few lines later, the 'Hypaspists' are also said to be "more than 3,000"....do the texts differ on this figure also?

The tradition of desertion to the enemy is far more likely correct; Plutarch’s will be a more apologetic version in Eumenes’ favour and likely Hieronymus’ creation..........The “soldiers” he collected are almost certainly mostly cavalry. This was Eumenes’ strongest arm and had been raised from his own satrapy. The bulk of any infantry will have been made up of Cappadoccians for similar reasons.

...I would say LESS likely, since in addition to the 'almost 1,000 cavalry' that Eumenes has straight after Nora, Diodorus also gives him 2,000 troops who must be infantry, and who 'follow him of their own free will' i.e. volunteers, not conscripted Cappadocians... (XVIII.53.7). You suggest that these might be Cappadocians, but they are hostile to Eumenes ( he holds many Cappadocian hostages in Nora), nor could so large a number of 'Cappadocian recruits' be raised and trained in such a short time. ( "within a few days" Diod XVIII.53.7) These 2,000 'volunteers' can really only realistically be part of the 'dispersed' army that have not gone over to Antigonus - and most probably those Macedonians loyal enough to Eumenes to provide him with a thousand strong bodyguard. This number also fits in well with the original 3,000 Macedonian infantry, for a further 200 infantry ( according to Plutarch) were in Nora, together with 500 cavalry. Thus "within a few days" of leaving Nora Eumenes has his original 500 'friends'/cavalry, a further 500 cavalry ( and cavalry are certainly not created in 'days' either), and at least 2,200 infantry....

How many of that 600 – cavalry and infantry – were Macedonians we have no way of knowing.

Well, Plutarch, drawing on much the same sources, says 500 cavalry and 200 infantry, Diodorus says "about 600", and later Diodorus says 500 cavalry/'friends' accompanied Eumenes out of Nora. The numbers are 'close enough'.....allowing for casualties of the siege etc
I would suggest that it is overwhelmingly likely that ALL(well,almost all :wink: ) were Macedonians - aside from the logic of keeping your best/most loyal/toughest guards about you ( e.g. the best of the Macedonian 'bodyguard' honoured with purple raiment etc), they are described as "friends" of Eumenes in a formal sense - an honour usually bestowed on Macedonians.

We have only the one notice of 3,000 Macedonians wandering about unemployed and these were Antigonus’. As above, the history of the period is replete with Macedonians transferring their allegiance often.

.....plus the 2,000 infantry and 500 cavalry referred to above, who can hardly be 'raw recruits' for the reasons stated....

There is no reason to doubt Diodorus’ clear statement that the army transferred its employment.

As I indicated earlier, this is not only contradicted by Plutarch, and I don't think you can just write off his account as Hieronymous being apologetic for Eumenes, but also contradicted by the rest of Diodorus (XVIII.53.6) "He gathered together his former friends and those who had once served under him and were now wandering about the country..." i.e. 'dispersed', as Plutarch says. These 500 cavalry and 2,000 infantry which Eumenes obtains "within days" must not only be already trained troops ( note we are not told he 'raised' troops, or 'recruited' troops), but to be with Eumenes "within a few days", they must also have been perilously close by, near to Antigonus' besieging army....a clear inference that they were skilled, trained, soldiers.
The statement that Antigonus "had taken over the army that had been with Eumenes" is a broad general one - and as you noted, even Diodorus has around 2,500 men of this army stay with Eumenes, again the numbers tying in.....

But the clincher that these men were Macedonian, and formed Eumenes 'Hypaspists' is their being 'brigaded' with, and having seniority over, the 'Silvershields', and that at the feast they must be the 'Hetairoi'/companions who feast alongside the 'Silvershields' since they can't be anyone else.....