The "Fred thread": the Argead Macedonian Army

[Paullus Scipio]

Macedon/George wrote:

In conclusion, in my opinion, the need for a more effective irregular army that would operate in any terrain mainly as raiders and of course as a countermeasure for raiders, garrisons in passes etc led to peltasts being rearmed with the thyreos rather than hoplites getting rid of the hoplon. In the course of decades, the hoplite saw less and less use in the field and his importance diminished even more.

I would broadly agree with this….the changing nature of Greek/Macedonian/Hellenistic warfare, and the impact of the gallic invasions were the likely causes of change. However, the adoption of the ‘thureos’ in Boeotia and elsewhere was by citizen troops who would previously have carried aspis/dory….


Paralus wrote:

I do not think so. If by "Ptolemy was both a personal friend and 'Friend' ( one of the seven) of Alexander" you are referring to the Ptolemy I quoted earlier, you are incorrect. Ptolemy, son of Lagos, was an attested somatophylax……… At the time of the siege of Tyre Ptolemy, son of Lagos, was not a somatophylax.

I was referring to Ptolemy Lagos throughout – purely as a generalised example (“such as Ptolemy”)of a senior Macedonian holding different posts, and likely being armed for all as the occasion demanded. I wasn’t referring to him taking part at Tyre specifically….

Hence my suggestion of the "Macedonian" shield. I disagree though: if this was hoplites' work why send in "longcheophoroi"? And just how "largeish" might you need to make these peltae (for this taxis) to suit your preconception?

See my previous post. The size of the ‘Macedonian shield’ falls within strict limits governed by the length of the forearm and the need to use the left hand to grasp the sarissa – 65-74 cm. As can be seen from the Agios frieze, a soldier thus armed differs little from a Hoplite, save for his slightly smaller shield, and shorter dual-purpose spear. The use of a weapon which could be thrown, and which was lighter and handier than a 'dory' is obvious in the context of holding it in the shield hand while climbing a ladder or scrambling up a breach.

Paul B. wrote:

Also, as to the thureophoroi, I don't think they were adopted because they were in any way superior to sarissaphoroi, or hoplites for that matter in set battle. As mentioned above, social and tactical change is more likely the reason.

I agree ( see my previous post), and mercenaries/mistophoroi likely ceased being Hoplites as well, between Alexander’s conquests and the Gallic invasions. The trend toward lighter, more flexible troop types had been going on for some time – the Gallic invasions perhaps exacerbated it, for it can hardly be co-incidence that spurred the Greeks into adopting the ‘thureos’ in the years following this

We sometimes lose sight of just how big and specialized the late dory was, perhaps because we compare it to the sarissa. Below is one of my favorite images comparing spears. IN this case the "dory" is a cavalry spear, so a couple feet need chopping off, but the form, though a bit exagerated, is probably the same as the late dory. The other spear is about appropriate for a longche, perhaps a little long. Perhaps Macedonians found a shorter, handier spear better suited to their non-sarissaphoroi needs.

The spear in question is the cavalry ‘Kamax’, and the other weapon falls within the typical length for a ‘longche'/short dual purpose spear.

There are Thracian shields that predate the adoption of the thureos that are rather close in proportion, see below: In fact, the whole notion of a medium weight infantryman with an oblong, single-center grip shield in a Greek context probably goes back to Iphicrates.

The image comes from the Kazanluk tomb c. 300 BC. As I remarked in my previous post, the Greeks had been aware of Thracian,Northern Illyrian and Italian use of ‘long’ and ‘ovoid’ shields pre-dating the Gallic invasions by hundreds of years ( such shields had been in continuous use since the 7 C BC Hallstatt period), but it took first-hand contact during the Gallic invasions to lead the Greeks to adopt it.
Without wishing to start another digression ( there’s already a couple of threads on it), I don’t believe Iphicrates reforms involved ‘long shields’.