The "Fred thread": the Argead Macedonian Army

[Paralus]

I’d a post penned to go earlier but took it down as this went up prior to posting! There’s far too much to deal with from the office so just a couple of corrections…

That the great Macedonian Lords vied with one another for overall control is not in doubt - Peucestes, Antigenes and Teutamus ( commanders of the 'Silver-shields', who are said to have numbered MORE than 3,000)…

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

But Plutarch says:
“Eumenes persuaded most of his soldiers to leave him, either out of regard for them, or because he was unwilling to trail after him a body of men too small to give battle, and too large to escape the enemy's notice.”

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.

That Eumenes’ army went over to Antigonus “en masse” is highly unlikely since they ‘dispersed’.

I don’t see why not: this was extremely commonplace throughout the period. There is no reason to doubt Diodorus’ clear statement that the army transferred its employment.

What does seem likely is that the mercenary element will have had few compunctions about seeking out a new employer, but that Eumenes’ Macedonians, the cavalry and 3,000 infantry may well not have – not least because Antigonus may have punished those who defied him and guarded Eumenes so loyally, as he did the 'Silvershields' later.

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. It did not benefit a grandee to indiscriminately punish or kill Macedonians – they were in rather limited supply after all. Thus the tradition that the Argyraspides were sent to be destroyed – again preserved by Plutarch – is exaggerated. Monophthalmus likely broke them up for garrison duty and sent the most belligerent (1,000 whom he’d well have known and likely led by Teutamos) to Arachosia.

Is there some evidence for this? Well, as part of the negotiations on his leaving Nora and becoming Antigonus’ “ally” he received horses, and …
“He also collected all the soldiers who had become scattered by his flight and were now wandering about the country, so that he had a force of almost a thousand horsemen.”

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. Those Eumenes was locked up in Nora with are described as his closest “philoi”. How many of that 600 – cavalry and infantry – were Macedonians we have no way of knowing.