The Makedonian phalanx -- why such depth?

[Paralus]

This is simply a "chicken and egg" translation problem. The word used is 'hyp-aspist'=shield -bearer, not the generic word for 'servant'...there are over 40 words in the ancient Greek lexicon for, or that relate, to 'servant', but "hyp-aspist" is not one of them ! The translator in this case simply did not want to sound clumsy by the more literal; “shield bearer”

If the fellow described in Anabasis is not a slave then you are suggesting he is a paid free man whose task it is to carry Xenophon’s arms?

Being even more pedantic, the correct word for shield-bearer in Attic dialect is 'hyperetes'... = military/Hoplite's baggage carrier/shield carrier)- who might also carry the Hoplite's shield among other things!

Yet Xenophon is consistent in the use of this term:

Hellenica, 4.5.15
toutous men ekeleuon tous hupaspistas aramenous apopherein eis Lechaion

they directed the shield-bearers to take up these wounded men and carry them back to Lechaeum


Ibid, 4.8.39
kai taut' elege kai para tou hupaspistou labôn tên aspida en chôrai autou machomenos apothnêiskei

Thus he spoke, and taking his shield from his shieldbearer, fell fighting on that spot.

These are obviously helots and, doubtless, you will argue that though they are “slaves” Xenophon is using the word in its descriptive sense. The term is used by Diodorus, Euripides and Herodotus. All describe a person performing the duty of the “squire” (for want of a better word). I would imagine that such duties were not performed by the free citizenry of Athens but rather by slaves.

It would seem that when the Macedonians used the word hypaspist (to differentiate the king’s foot guard from the infantry who’d received their former title pezhetairoi) it must now mean “hoplite armed apsis bearers”. For some reason it cannot have been adopted because its descriptive sense neatly describes the purpose of these troops.