I got #12 wrong about what Abdalonymus was doing when Hephaestion came across him. I thought he was grooming his horse. 
oh well now I know. That was fun and educational, thanks for the link!What, then, to make of Diodorus, 17.65.1?Taphoi wrote:Hence in the “Vulgate” sources, it appears that Somatophylakes generally means the personal and official Bodyguards of the king and not a regiment of “guards”.
After the king had marched out of Babylon and while he was still on the road, there came to him, sent by Antipater, five hundred Macedonian cavalry and six thousand infantry, six hundred Thracian cavalry and three thousand five hundred Trallians, and from the Peloponnese four thousand infantry and little less than a thousand cavalry.1 From Macedonia also came fifty sons of the king's Friends sent by their fathers to serve as bodyguards.
I do not think it amounts to "special pleading". The terminology in Arrian is confused. Diodorus claims Hephaestion “commanded” the body guards. I can think of nowhere else that a “commander” of the “seven” is attested. That is not to say that it might not be but I can’t think of it.Taphoi wrote:It amounts to special pleading to read across Arrian’s usage to re-interpret Diodorus’ statement that Hephaistion was chief of the Bodyguards, when there is no reason to disbelieve that the usual Vulgate meaning is intended.
It also seems that Arrian loosely used somatophylakes to refer to the entire corps of the hypaspists and not just one squadron among them. C. Bradford Welles thought this a sufficient reason to discount the possibility that Hephaistion commanded hypaspists at Gaugamela, because Nicanor seems to have commanded the hypaspists there.
Nicanor is indeed referred to as being in command of the hypaspists. In exactly the same way that Philotas is in command of the Companion Cavalry. It is Cleitus, though, who is in command of the ile basilike or “Royal” squadron of that cavalry.Taphoi wrote:It is certainly untrue that the command of a squadron of hypaspists is in any way as significant as command of the Seven (later Eight) Bodyguards. These men became the top staff officers of Alexander’s regime. It is tantamount to Hephaistion having already been Alexander’s deputy at Gaugamela
Actually the Greek is pros ten somatophylakian, which could be translated as “with a view to becoming Bodyguards”, so it is a bit ambiguous what Diodorus means (and recall that Diodorus is summarising Cleitarchus, often rather clumsily). However, this use is anyway not inconsistent with my view that somatophylakes always means personal and official bodyguards of the king in the Vulgate, because we know (e.g. the Pages’ conspiracy) that the Pages did serve as personal bodyguards around Alexander’s tent. I do not say that the word always means a member of the Seven, because it can be used (as here?) in its literal and descriptive sense as well being the official title of the Seven.Paralus wrote:What, then, to make of Diodorus, 17.65.1?
The entire regiment of the hypaspists was only 3000 strong or less. If Arrian suggests that 700 of the agema were only a detachment, then it looks as though the agema of the hypaspists is the formal title of the entire regiment, in which case Nicanor commanded the unit at Gaugamela and there is no sub-set who were the bodyguards (i.e. Arrian uses the term for all of them).Paralus wrote:Judging by Arrian’s claim that some 700 of the agema crossed the Hydaspes with him, it was a sizeable unit as well.
Three thousand, or three chiliarchies, is the minimum. The Argyraspids, the hypaspists of Philip and of Alexander, are numbered at three thousand. The numbers of the native (and Macedonian) hypaspists seem also to be set at three thousand. The agema will have been in addition to this as the Argyraspids, after Alexander’s death, have no agema.Taphoi wrote:The entire regiment of the hypaspists was only 3000 strong or less. If Arrian suggests that 700 of the agema were only a detachment, then it looks as though the agema of the hypaspists is the formal title of the entire regiment, in which case Nicanor commanded the unit at Gaugamela and there is no sub-set who were the bodyguards (i.e. Arrian uses the term for all of them).
Paralus wrote:For Hephaestion’s promotion to the seven, this seemingly came after Ptolemy – not son of Lagos – who was one of the seven died leading hypaspists at Halicarnassus (Arrian, 1.22.4). If so, there is nothing strange in that Hephaestion, as member of the seven, also leads the agema of the hypaspists having succeeded him. In which case, there is no need for us to be concerned over his lack seniority with respect to Nicanor or any of the officers of the fleet.
I feel it's a bit disloyal for you publicly to attack the views of your expert compatriot in this shameless fashion Paralus. But I guess it's between you and your conscienceAB Bosworth wrote:A somewhat anomalous position in the hierarchy of command is that of the Royal bodyguards... Membership was incompatible with any post away from court... It also seems to have been incompatible with commands in the army. In the early years of the reign there is no known instance of a bodyguard holding a senior commission; and, when Ptolemy son of Seleucus took over command of a phalanx battalion he ceased to hold the title of bodyguard.
And then quoted Bosworth as saying:Taphoi wrote:Conversely, if Hephaistion only commanded a squadron of the hypaspists then he would have reported to Nicanor and would have been clearly junior to a large number of army and naval officers. As commander of the Seven, he would have reported directly to Alexander and nobody else would have outranked him. The fleet (hundreds of ships) is very likely to have had officers ranking above a hypaspist squadron leader within it, so how could Alexander have placed Hephaistion in command of it without making a nonsense of his command structure, if Hephaistion was a mere squadron leader? It would have been like putting Prince Harry in charge of the Ark Royal.
The Bodyguards were not strictly within the military command structure. The king appointed them personally and a military command record was probably not required, whereas general army appointments were discussed with the senior officers (as we know from the Ephemerides). This seems to be how Alexander contrived to make Hephaistion his deputy. He didn’t promote him rapidly up the army command chain. He bypassed it.
So if being a bodyguard meant that a military command record was probably not required and membership seems to have been incompatible with commands in the army, then why would this preclude Hephaistion commanding an infantry division at Gaugamela?AB Bosworth wrote:A somewhat anomalous position in the hierarchy of command is that of the Royal bodyguards... Membership was incompatible with any post away from court... It also seems to have been incompatible with commands in the army. In the early years of the reign there is no known instance of a bodyguard holding a senior commission; and, when Ptolemy son of Seleucus took over command of a phalanx battalion he ceased to hold the title of bodyguard.
)I have to confess that I'm rather losing track of this thread, too. But, on the basis of what Taphoi wrote (quoting Bosworth), if Hephaistion were a somatophylax (one of the Seven), then he could not have held another command. So the argument would be that, if he were commanding an ile of hetairoi, or whatever, then he cannot have been a somatophylax.amyntoros wrote:So if being a bodyguard meant that a military command record was probably not required and membership seems to have been incompatible with commands in the army, then why would this preclude Hephaistion commanding an infantry division at Gaugamela?
Hmm, I wondered if that were the case. It leads me to some more questions, however. Who were the other six at that time? And doesn't this also mean that when Hephaistion was given different military commands at a later date he must no longer have been a somatophylax? If he had been one of the "seven" at Gaugamela, that is. And if he wasn't one of the seven at Gaugamela, then he could have been leading infantry, couldn't he?marcus wrote:I have to confess that I'm rather losing track of this thread, too. But, on the basis of what Taphoi wrote (quoting Bosworth), if Hephaistion were a somatophylax (one of the Seven), then he could not have held another command. So the argument would be that, if he were commanding an ile of hetairoi, or whatever, then he cannot have been a somatophylax.
SEG 31.636athenas owl wrote: Well, I would like to see some examples of Amyntor from Macedon prior to Alexander. Not being huffy, but would like to see them. And perhaps the exact wording of the SEG 31.636 and it's context? Please. I have many of them online bookmarked, but not that one.
So your interpretation of the Kolophon inscription differs, then? Obviously it does, but why do you feel the other interpretation is wrong? Again, I just want to know.
As for Hephaistion, I do think that the fact that Hephaistos is not known to be venerated to any degree in Macedonia, but certainly elsewhere from Lycia to Athens is indicative of a heritage not Macedonian. Though I suppose that perhaps Amyntor had a special time on Samthrace and was inspired to name a son after Hephaistos or in honour of him.
Which reminds me, can anyone recommend a good book on the etymology of Greek names? An extensive one. For example though we know her as Sappho, she might have thought of herself as Psappha. I would appreciate this more than you can know.
Well, it would appear to be so. I can't remember all the evidence that Bosworth put forward for this, but it appears in other books and articles as well; and, when you look at the careers of the named somatophylakes, it does appear that they didn't hold other military commands while they were members of the Seven.amyntoros wrote:Hmm, I wondered if that were the case.
It's OK, I have a list somewhere - can't be sure where, however, so it might take me a while to find it. But I do have it, carefully put together from close reading of Arrian ...amyntoros wrote:Who were the other six at that time?
Precisely the job of the agema of the hypaspists; not to say the rest of them as well. It is why they are stationed with the companion cavalry and why they are attested with him on foot. At Issus they are described as such as Arrian rolls over the line during the assembly manoeuvres: the hypaspists abut the companion cavalry even though Alexander extends his line further right. Hephaestion, if he were somatophylax at the time and commanding the agema from horseback, will still have been discharging the remit of somatophylax.marcus wrote:Which does make perfect sense because they are supposed to be the king's bodyguard - if they are off commanding other troops, then they can't remain close to the king and do their job.
We do not know enough – nor do we have enough good information – to be dogmatic. I have disagreed with AB Bosworth, "my expert compatriot", before – my conscience is fine. Though, I don’t know that I am disagreeing. I don’t see a problem with Hephaestion – as a bodyguard – commanding the king’s “foot bodyguards”, adjacent to the king, at Gaugamela.Taphoi wrote:I feel it's a bit disloyal for you publicly to attack the views of your expert compatriot in this shameless fashion Paralus. But I guess it's between you and your conscience.
I've been following this thread with great interest, and like you, I wouldn't claim to be any great expert on military ranks, but I rather think the assumption that Alexander would have given Hephaistion a high rank from the start is one that Heckel was trying to demolish, by arguing in favour of his being in command of hypaspists. I don't know why that should seem more lowly, but there does seem to be this pecking order in military thinking, that cavalry in general outrank infantry. A class thing, perhaps.amyntoros wrote:
Okay, an entirely personal observation/question here from a person operating more from logic than from extensive knowledge of the military. (All authorities on military matters feel free to jump in.
Best regards,
Precisely the job of the agema of the hypaspists; not to say the rest of them as well. It is why they are stationed with the companion cavalry and why they are attested with him on foot. At Issus they are described as such as Arrian rolls over the line during the assembly manoeuvres: the hypaspists abut the companion cavalry even though Alexander extends his line further right. Hephaestion, if he were somatophylax at the time of Guagamela and commanding the agema from horseback, will still have been discharging the remit of somatophylax.marcus wrote:Which does make perfect sense because they are supposed to be the king's bodyguard - if they are off commanding other troops, then they can't remain close to the king and do their job.
We do not know enough – nor do we have enough good information – to be dogmatic. I have disagreed with AB Bosworth, "my expert compatriot", before – my conscience is fine. Though, I don’t know that I am disagreeing. I don’t see a problem with Hephaestion – as a bodyguard – commanding the king’s “foot bodyguards”, adjacent to the king, at Gaugamela.Taphoi wrote:I feel it's a bit disloyal for you publicly to attack the views of your expert compatriot in this shameless fashion Paralus. But I guess it's between you and your conscience.
Thus it becomes clear that of the reported injured, all are on the right side of the field. Menidas is with the “mercenary cavalry” in the van on the right. Indeed he is instructed to prevent the Persian attempted encirclement. Hephaestion is, in Heckel's opinion (with which I tend to agree), on horse and commanding the Royal Hypaspists and Coenus the first battalion of the phalanx.Of the phalanx of Macedonian infantry, nearest to the cavalry had been posted first the select corps of shield-bearing guards, and then the rest of the shield-bearing guards, under the command of Nicanor, son of Parmenio. Next to these was the brigade of Coenus, son of Polemocrates; after these that of Perdiccas, son of Orontes; then that of Meleager, son of Neoptolemus; then that of Polysperchon, son of Simmias; and last that of Amyntas, son of Andromenes, under the command of Simmias, because Amyntas had been despatched to Macedonia to levy an army. The brigade of Craterus, son of Alexander, held the left end of the Macedonian phalanx, and this general commanded the left wing of the infantry.
It is therefore clear that Alexander had not engaged the Persian right. The Thessalians took care of that “sector”. I’d argue that Alexander has engaged in a swing to the left after scattering the Persian left and left of centre and engaged the cavalry units of the centre part of the field who were – apparently – trying to get away. These cannot be those Persians of the left as Arrian clearly tells us they were unaware of the rout of the right and, more to the point, were in the process of delivering “a flank attack on Parmenio”.Alexander was now on the point of engaging the Persian right; but his help was not needed, as in this sector the Thessalian cavalry had fought hardly less magnificently that Alexander.
Assuming such a command existed, who suggested such?Taphoi wrote:It is certainly untrue that the command of a squadron of hypaspists is in any way as significant as command of the Seven (later Eight) Bodyguards.
Are you suggesting that the “Seven” were a separate cavalry unit? They – to my knowledge – are not ever attested as such. Arrian lists all the commanders of the cavalry squadrons on the right in this battle; Hephaestion’s name is notable by its absence. Although he does not bother to go down below squadron level, it might be thought that he would indicate command of said unit by the later injured “Hephaestion himself" Again, I can think of nowhere that any of the sources define the “Seven” as a cavalry troop with a commander.Taphoi wrote:It is also in speaking of Hephaistion's wound at Gaugamela that Diodorus 17.61.3 states that Hephaistion was the commander of the Bodyguards. There is simply no other explanation than that this meant the Seven since it must have been a cavalry unit and since it cannot have been the Royal Squadron of the Companion Cavalry, since that was commanded by Cleitus the Black at Gaugamela.