Historians of EB Team UNITE!!

[gran_guitarra]

Okay, thank you for the information.

But,
if the Asthetairoi were created to combat the rise of Rome and were merely a super heavy phalanx, why are there mentions of them fighting in Alexander's campaigns?

[Landwalker]

Out of curiosity, exactly where are these mentions that you're... mentioning?

Cheers.

[pezhetairoi]

@Gran Guitarra

I believe that Arrian and other historians who recorded Alexander's campaigns were very loose with their terminology. The argyraspidai were created in India by Alexander, but every now and then they were still referred to as 'hypaspistai'. Not to mention things like the so-called 'Seleukid legionnaires' still being referred to as argyraspidai. In fact, records of the Seleukid-Roman Thermopylae refer to the Argyraspidai as peltastai! So it would not be wise to take the naming literally.

Especially when the Asthetairoi refer clearly in the Alexandrian case to a phalanx soldier who was a townsman or citizen, it could just as easily be just a synonym for the Pezhetairoi, who were Makedonian citizens. After all, one is 'Foot Companions' and one 'Citizen Companions', they are not necessarily mutually exclusive. It would be the equivalent of Homer using different adjectives to describe Iliad heroes. 'Well-greaved Achilles' and 'Stout-speared Achilles' do not indicate different people named Achilles.

For some idea of just how confusing the Greek historians made naming conventions, refer to 'The Seleucid Army: Organisation and Tactics in the Great Campaigns' by Bezalel Bar-Kochva. There's a whole chapter on the nature of recruitment of Klerouchoi and Argyraspidai that should utterly confuse you by the time he finishes discussing the different contexts and usages of the words. As said before, Agema, Hypaspistai, Peltastai, Chrysaspides, Chalkaspides and Hetairoi all enter into the chapter at some point or other.

[gran_guitarra]

I read a book about Alexander, and it clearly stated that they were two different forces.

According to the book there were too few mentions (at least available or known to the author) to be able to successfully/surely determine their equipment and purpose. They were also clearly separate from both the Hetairoi and Pezhetairoi, at least in what I read.

[abou]

Except Chrysaspides never existed. Bar-Kochva made an error, which I assume he will correct if he ever gets the chance.

The Astheteroi can be translated as "closest companions". Whether that means a higher rank or higher quality I do not know. It is probable, but we do know they occupied the "position of honor" - as in, they were deployed on the right of the phalanx closest to the king.

The Hysteroi Pezhetairoi are still in EB. They are the reformed phalanx.

The Argyraspides developed during Alexander's campaigns and were formed from the older members of the phalanx. This seems to have changed by EB's time and in the Seleukid army they are formed by the sons of military settlers. The Makedonians are still a bit of a mystery. We see a corps d'elite at Pydna, but I do not know if that is them.

The term of peltastai for the elite phalanxes seems to have arisen because they had used the larger pelte shield rather than the smaller, regular phalanx shield.

[Pharnakes]

The term of peltastai for the elite phalanxes seems to have arisen because they had used the larger pelte shield rather than the smaller, regular phalanx shield.

What, like the Basilikon agema in EB, you mean? Or did they still use the full length sarrisa?

[abou]

What, like the Basilikon agema in EB, you mean? Or did they still use the full length sarrisa?

You're confusing the pelte with the thuros. The pelte is circular.

And yes, they did use the full sarissa.

[pezhetairoi]

Nice article that. Amazing the things you can find on the internet... About the chrysaspides. Without reopening that long and drawn-out debate over it, I would just like to say that I believe the existed, not as a separate military unit per se, but just for the military parade at Daphne, they were probably specially created. In other words, I believe they had no separate training whatsoever, but were probably just argyraspidai with shields faced in a different colour for variation, like the chalkaspidai also mentioned. But they were all argyraspidai.

@gran guitarra: What book about Alexander did you read? Title please? I should like to locate in my local libraries if possible and devour it. Before this thread to be sure, I had never heard of the Asthetairoi, not even in my battered copy of JFC Fuller.

[Timoleon]

This long but useful article describes the evolution of Hellenistic Infantry from the Iphikrates "reforms" to the end of the Hellenistic Infantry (it is splitted in two parts).
It gives information about peltasts, thureophoroi, phalangites, pezhetairoi , etc.

The term of peltastai for the elite phalanxes seems to have arisen because they had used the larger pelte shield rather than the smaller, regular phalanx shield.

This is true. Moreover it seems that the professional Makedonian pezhetairoi were trained as skirmishers / peltasts too, in order to be able to perform a dual role in the battle field.