Seleucid and Ptolemaic Reformed Armies 168-145 BC (2) Ptolemaic Army

87 Pages·2016·14.62 MB·English

by  D. Nicolle

fllONrVERTPCJBLICATlONS
SELEUCID AND PTOLEMAIC REFORMED
ARMIES 168-145 BC. VOLUME 2:
THE PTOLEMAIC ARMY
Nick Sekunda
Colour plates by
Angus McBride
r
SELEUCID AND PTOLEMAIC REFORMED
ARMIES 168-145 BC
VOLUME 2: THE PTOLEMAIC ARMY
UNDER PTOLEMY VI PlllLOMETOR
Nick Sekunda
Colour Plates
by
Angus McBride
LineDrawingsby
EdOrg
Published by Montvert Publications
Published in 1995byMontvert Publications AUTBOR'S DEDICATION,
CCopyright 1995MontvertPublications To my wonderfulMum.
All rights reserYed. No pan ofthis publication maybe
reproducedortransmittedinanyform orby anymeans PREFACE.
electronic or mechanical induding photocopying,
ThehistoryoftheHellenistickingdomsduringtheperiod
recordingoranyinfonnationstorageandretrievalsystem
underexaminationisoomplicated.Theancienthistorical
withoutthepriorwrittenconsentofthepublishcrs.
narrativeswhichooredealtwiththisperiodarepreserved
onlyinfragments, andthepublicationofnewinscriptions
orpapyri requires a process ofoonstant revision ofthe
chronologicalframework. Limitedspacepermitsonlya
Montvcrt Publications, 2 Kingswood Grove, Reddish.
StockportSK3 6SP condensed ac:c:ount ofrapidly<hanging events in this
book. I have, nevertheless, attempted to make my
historicalsectionsasup-to-datewithcurrentscholarship
as possible. Conscious as I am of my own literary
Montvert Publications (Distribution), PO Box 25,
StockportSK36RU shortcomings, I have not hesitated to incorporate some
ofthebetter-turnedphrasespennedbyMahaffy,Bevan,
andTarn,whicharticulatcmysentiments50muchbetter
thanIcouldeverhopeto. I haveattributedthelengthier
ISBN I 874101 03 5
sections,butthediscerningreadermaydetectmanyother
patches of prose bcneath which, consciously or
subconsciously,liesthehandofoneoftheseoldmasters.
A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from
the British Library.
Aswith Volume I, Andy CaIlan has helped megreatly
throughout the text Finally, I should like to thank the
series editor, Phil Greenough, for making this a better
bookthanit might havebeen.
FORMATAND LABELLING
Volume2'schaptenfollow sequentiallyfromVolume
I,hencethefintcbapterinthisvolumeisCbapter6.
The main body black & white figure. follow
sequentiallyfromVolumeI,sothefintisFig.65. The
A notetothereader: This isoneofaseriesofMontvert
onlyexceptionappliestotbesupportingphotosinthe
titles which aim to present some ofthe best upto dale
appendices.
analysesofthehistory,dress,equipmentandorganization
Thecolourplatesfollow sequentiallyfrom Volume .,
ofvariousancient andmedieval armies.
so the first is Plate 9. The exception to this is the
central double-page-spread colour plate which bas
deliberatelybeen leftunnumbered.
There are no colour photos (as opposed to plates or
paintings) in Volume 1, so thefint iD thisvolume is
ColourPhoto 1.
Therearetwoappendices.oneODHermopolismaterial
and oneon Sidonmaterial,which havebeenlabelled
asAppendix B and Appendix S respectively u taide
memoires'. These have heeD positioned in front of,
and as a lead in to, the bulk ofthe pictorial part of
lypesetby Legend DTP
this volume aDd, if desired, can be read almost
Stockport, Cheshire
independentlyofthehistorical sections.
The pages are labelled conventionally and do not
Printedby Joseph Ward Colourprint Lld.
follow sequentiallyfrom Volume 1.
Dewsbwy,Yorkshire
CHAPTER 6
MllJTARY REFORM IN THE By about 165 the revolt had spread to the ThebaId in
Upper Egypt. It seems that Philometor moved against
PTOLEMAIC ARMY.
the rebels peoona1ly(Died. 31.17bj, thougll stillaged
only 19orso, andsoon regainedcontrol ofthatremote
In Egypt the triple monarchy ofPhilometor. Cleopatra
province, all except for the cityofPanopolis. standing
andEuergetes had not lasted long. Anembassywas, of
high and inaccessibleon an ancient mound, wherethe
course,immediatelydespatchedtoRometoofferthanks,
most active ofthe rebels had gathered. Judgingthat a
under the command of onc of the 'Friends', one
frontal assaultwas outofthequestion, bothonac:oxmt
Nomenios. ThedualreignofPhiJometorandEuergetes
ofthestrengthofthepositionandtheua.lofitsdd'enders,
lasted five years, against a background of Egyptian
Philometorsenleddowntoa siege, whichprovedtobe
nationalist discontent, the intrigue ofeunuchs and ex
both lengthy and arduous. Eventually the city fell and
slavesatCourt, and family strife.
theringleaderswerepunished,followingwhichPtolemy
returnedto Alexandria.
The Native Revolts.
The invasion ofAntiochus, the dynastic strife and the
Ashasalreadybeenmentioned.wearetold(Diod.30.14)
native disturbances had led to considerable economic
thatattheBattleafMouRt CasiosAntiochusEpiphanes
dislocation in thecountly. Many fled from thetroubled
hadtakengreatpainstosparethelivesof'theEgyptians'.
south to the north. Large numbers ofnative Egyptians
andthatthisactofgenerositycontributedgreatlyto his
hadbecnkilledorwerestillinhiding.therewasascarcity
seizureofPclusiwnandthesubsequentconquestofEgypl
oflabour throughout Egypt, the land lay untilled and
AlthoughitispossiblethatDiodemsiscallingtheGreek
famine threatened. Thegovernmenttried toensurethat
military settlers in Egypt, who had presumably been
everyone should participate in the cultivation of the
mobilized for the campaign, 'Egyptians'. it would be
abandoned land, and theroyalofficials. naturally, ""'ere
morestraightforwardto interpret hiswordsasreferring
over·zealous in their orders. The native machimoi
tothenativeEgyptiansoldiery,themachimoi,whowould petitioned the king, and he was forced to ease the
also have been mobilized for the campaign. Ifthis is
ordinances. Therevoltofficiallyended in 164,itseems,
correct. and it is true that Antiochuswon greatsupport butPhilometorwasforced10proclaimageneralamnesty
in Egypt for this act ofmercy, it may be that this is at
in 163 in ordertopacifythecountly. Even so,bandiUy
least one factor lying behind the Egyptian nationalist
was widespread throughout the 150$, and the countly
activityofthenextdecadeormort.
took many years to settle down again (M.Rostovtzefl',
The Social and Economic Hislory ofrhe Hellenistic
Soon after Antiochus' withdrawal oneofthe 'Friends'
",0,1d'1/(1953)pp. 718-724).
ofPhilometor,anEgyptiannamedDionysiosPetosarapis
('Gift ofSarapis') attempted to seize the throne (Diod.
TheDisputebetweenPhilometorand Euergeles.
31.15a). We aretold that Petosarapis was pre~minent
ofallthenativeEgyptiansonthebattlefield,andwcmay
Whilst Philometor had been away with the army,
perhaps assume from these words that he had
Euergetes had been intriguing with the mob of
commanded the Egyptian machimoi at the Battle of
Alexandria,atthattime"averymongrelcity"(Mahaffey
MountCasios. HepretendedthatPhilometorhadurged
p.239).In 164Philometorwasforced tofleeAlexandria,
him tokill Euergetes, andappealed to the Alexandrian
and went toRometopetition for his kingdomback. At
mob assembled in the stadium, forjustice. The mob,
whi~ped RomePhilometorwasmetbyhisfirstcousin, theexiled
into a fury, threatened to kill Philometor. but
SeleucidprinceDemetrius, whogreeted himwith royal
thetwo brothers appeared together in amity before the
pomp. Philometoravoidedthisacclaim, however, ashe
crowds and managed to keeptheirjoint throneaswell
wishedtousehisapparentpovertytoarousethesympathy
asthei;lives.PetosarapiswithdrewtoEleusis,appealing
oftheSenate. HeaskedDemetrius toleavehimbe, and
tothediscontentedsoldieryoftheAlexandriangarrison
bid his companion An::hias and the others who bad
tothrowtheirlotinwithhim, andmanagedtoassemble
accompanied him to stay with the Seleucid prince. He
a force numbering some 4,000 men there. He was,
himselffoundlodgingswithanAlexandrianlandscape
however,defeatedinbattle,andwasforcedtoswimnaked
painter("ro7lO')'~'kleriusMaximus5.1 callshima
acrosstheNiletotheopenCOWltrybeyond.Manynatives
pie/orAJexondrinus) called Demetrius, living frugally
joined this charismatic man ofaction, and soon large
in the upstairs attic. This crumb of information is of
areaofEgypt""'ere thrown inlo revolt.
3
considerableinterestfortworeasons.Itfirstdemonstrates Alexandriaagainsttheirwill. Evenworsenewsreached
thehigh levelofcullureoftheyoungking,for hewould EuergetesfromCyrene,forthecityofCyrenebadrevolted
hardlyhavechosenDemetriustolodgewithifhehadn't against him, his governor Ptolemy Sympetesis, an
knownthepainter,andthereisnoperticularreasonwhy Egyptian,hadgoneovertotherebels,anditseemedthat
akingshouldknowapainterifhewerenotinterestedin theothercitieswereonthevergeofjoiningintherevolt
art. Diodorus (31.18.2) in fact lells us that Philometor too.TIv:CyreneanstookthefieldandEuergeiesmarched
had frequently entertained Demetrius when he was onthecity,onlytofindanadvancedguardofCyrenaeans
residentinAlexandria.Thepassageisalsoimportantin andLibyansoccupyingthepassesleadingintoCyrenaica.
informing usofthe fact thatan Alexandrian landscape Hedivided his forces into two, embarked one balfand
painterwasactive in Rome in the 16Os. It was through orderedthemto sail roundthepassand taketheenemy
Demetrius,andtheotherswhocameafter,thatknowledge in the rear, while he himselfsuccessfully attacked the
ofAlexandrianartwastransferredtoItaly,andcopiesof pass frontalJy. After six days march. the ships sailing
Alexandrian originals come to be preserved in the alongside him under the conunand ofMochIynus. he
frescoesofPompeii (seeFigures2and 3). met the Cyrenaican army, consistingof8,000 foot and
500 cavalry, and was eventually defeated. in battle.
Followingthisimaginitivedisplayofamateurdramatics, Nevertheless, Euergetessomehowmanagedto returnto
the Senate, their sympathies engaged by the plight of Cyrene,perhapsthroughtheinterventionoftbeRoman
Philometor, divided the Ptolemaic state into two, legates.
assigningCyprusandEgypttoPhilometor,andCyrenaica
toEuergetes, uponwhich Philometorsailed to Cyprus. Both Ptolemies sent embassies to Rome to plead their
Meanwhile in Alexandria the regime ofEuergetes was cause,Euergetes'beingledbyKomanosandhisbrother,
becoming increasingly unpopular on account of its andPhilometor'sonce againbyMenyllusofAJabanda.
cruelly. The reign ofterror in the capital was presided The Roman legales Torquatus and Merola supported
overbyoneTimotheus,whoevensubjecledAskJepiades, Euergetes, and the senate declared that the envoys of
the administrator ofthe city, to torture. The city mob Philometor must leave Italy within five days, and that
eventually rose against Euergetes. Timotheus was Rome'salliancewithPhilometorwasatanend..ltseems,
assassinated,andbyMay 163Philometoragainruledin however,thatRometooknoconcretestepstoimplement
Alexandria. their allocation of Cyprus to Euergetes. Philometor
refused to bow to Rome's empty threats, and retained
EuergetestravelledtoRome10appealagainstthetenns controlofbothEgyptandCyprusfortherestofhisreign.
ofthepartition, andbeggedtheSenatetoassignCyprus
to him. Despile the efforts ofMenyllus of Alabanda, Military Reform inthePtolemaieArmy.
Philometor's envoy in Rome, the Senale agreed to
Euergetes' request, and assigned Titus Torquatus and WenowcomeacrossevidenceforreforminthePtolemaic
Gnaeus Merula 10 accomplish his installation on the Army. The earliest reference 10 the new 'Romanized'
island peacefully. Euergetes landed in Greece,collected military structures is dated 163 BC, which provides us
a force ofmercenaries, and then sailed to the Rhodian witha terminusante quem forthe refonns, but itis not
PeraiaandthentoSideenrouteforCyprus. AtSidethe possible, givenourcurrent stateofknowledge, toguess
Roman legates persuaded Euergetes to dismiss his at a more precise date within the turbulent tableau of
mercenaries, as their instructions were that his return Egyptian history of the earlier 160s when the change
wastobeachievedwithoutwar.Euergetesagreedtomeet may have taken place. Research into the military
the Roman legates on the borderofCyrene, while they structuresofthePtolemaicstateissomewhathampered
themselves would go to Alexandria in order to induce by the complex nature ofthe evidence. The Ptolemaic
Philometorto submit to the Senate's request. Euergetes army was essentially divided into two components, the
sailed for Crete, along with his mercenary officer standingarmyandthec1erucharmy.Thestandingarmy
DamasippostheMacedonian,whereheraisedapersonal comprised the regiments ofguardswhich protectedthe
guardofathousandCretanmercenaries.andthenlanded person ofthe king and the court, and the regiments of
atApisontheAfricancoast. Itwasby nowthesummer mercenaries stationed in garrisons throughout the
of162. Empire.
The Roman legates, however, did not arrive, with or The cleruchic army was a 'territorial' anny. From the
without Philometor, for the lalter detained them in reign ofPtolemy I Soter onwards, and especially from
4
the reign ofPtolemy 11 Philadelphos, ex-soldiers were presumably in command of infantry units with
allottedplots (kl2l'Oi - hencethe appellationkMl'Ouehoi establishment strengths, based on a file of16 men. of
giventothesettlen;),inreturnfortheliabilitytoperfonn 1,024 and 512 men respectively. The third-<:entwy
militaryserviceintimeofwar,ifcalledupon(Crawford, Ptolemaicpapyrialsomentionofficerswhoholdtheranks
Kerkeosiris pp. 55-85). An individual c1eruch held a of chi/iarehos (Pros. Plol. 2290-2301) and
particular rank, and belonged to a particular regiment penlalwsiarchO$ (Pros. Ptoi. 2302-2320).andsowemay
in this territorial army, and upon mobilization a fully safely conclude that the regimental structure of
fonned army should, in theory, have constituted itself. Alexander's army continued in the Ptolemaic army
Atfirst, for example during the Third Syrian War, the throughoutthethirdcentury. Wealsohearoftaxtarchoi
systemseemstohaveworkedreasonablywell,butbythe 'commanders ofcompanies' (Pros. Pto/. 2288-9), who
endofthethirdcenturythesystemwasalreadybeginning mayhavecommandedan infantrysub-unitlowerdown
to malfunction. As well as their rank and regiment, in theorganizational hierarchy.
individual cleruchs have all sorts ofother titles in the
papyri, which are, as yet, not understood with any Whenthede!amikos,or'commanderoften',appearsin
certainty. Consequently, it isdifficult tobecertain how the papyri (Pros. Ptot. 2273-2287) with further
muchmilitarypracticesinthestandingarmyandinthe informationastowhatunithebelongsto,heisfrequently
c1eruc:hic:armywouldhavebeenidentical.Itisprobable, found to be serving in the cavalry. In many cases.
however, that the two forces were identical in their however, the ann of service is not known, and the
regimental structures and ranks. From papyrological dekanikos was probably an infantry rank too (Lesquier
material which is in themain relevant tothe c1eruchic p.92). Aswellasthedelcanikoi,wealsohearofdimoiritai
army, the following rough outlinecan be given for the 'double-pay men' (Pros. Ptot. 3878, 3921 and 3994).
organization of the Ptolemaic army during the third These two ranks closely parallel those in use in the
century.Themilitaryranksheldbyindividualsappearing infantry file ofsixteen men in the Macedonian anny
in thePtolemaic papyri have beencollated inthe work under Alexander. The organization of the file under
Pl'Osopogrophio Pto/emoteo. In the text below I have Alexander is given in Arrian, Anab. 7.23.3-4. For
giventhenumbersastheyappearinthisworkinbrackets traditional reasons the file is called a dekos, or 'ten',
aftereach rank. even though it numbered sixteen men. Preswnably the
Macedonian file had once numbered ten men in the
ThePtolemaic ArmyDuringthe Third Century. distant past, but, when the number of the file was
expanded to sixteen men in line with current Greek
As with all the early Hellenistic annies, the Ptolemaic militarypractice,theoldtitleofdekaswasretained.The
army largely followed the organizational structures of commanderofthedewwascalleda dekadarchos,and
the Macedonian army as they stood at the end ofthe thedekasalsobadadimofritbandtwodekastatll'Oi'ten
reign of Alexander the Great. The cavalry under stater men'. Thecontext ofArrian's discussion is bow
Alexander was organized into hipparchies and thedekaswasreorganizedtoaccomodatenativePersians,
'squadrons',oritai.Eachhipparchyhadatleasttwoitoi, but it is reasonabletosupposethatthedekadorchosand
andeachfienumberedatleast250.ThePtolemaiccavalry thedimoiritesstood at the front ofthe two half-files of
was also divided inlo numbered hipparchics, and then eight men,andthetwodekastateroistoodatthebackof
intoitoi..Tenhipparchiesareattestedasthingsstandat eitherhalf-file.Whilstthedekastoterotareunattestedin
the moment, minus numbers six and nine(Vant'Dack, the papyri the dimoiritoi are. The dekanikos is simply
Ptolemoica Seteeta p. 53). A cavalry tochos may also an alternativetitlefor thedekadarchos. The Ptolemaic
haveexisted,anda dekaniacommandedbyadekanikos filewaspresumablycalleda dekania.
(Lesquierpp. 90-1). Thecavalrywas, it seems, largely
unaffectedbythemilitaryreformscarriedoutduringthe The last reference to any soldier holding the rank of
reign of Philometor, for the cavalry continued to be dekanikos comes in a manumission document from
organized into hipparchies and ;Ioi, though the rankof KrokodilopolisintheArsinoiteNomedatingto 165BC.
dekanikosis notattestedafter 165. ItmentionsoneAdrastossonofAdrastos,anativeofthe
EuboeancityofHestiaia,andsopresumablyamercenary
Chi/iarehoi 'commanders of a thousand', and soldier,dekanikos oftbe'Regimentformerlycommanded
pentekosiarcho; 'commandersoffive hundred' areboth by Noumenios' (Pl'Os. Ptol. 2273). The commander of
attested in the infantry ofthe later army ofAlexander this regiment has been identified with Noumenios son
(Arr., Anab. 7.25.6; Plut., Vit Aler. 76.6). They were ofHerakIeiodoros ofAlexandria, the same Noumenios
5
whohad beensentonembassytoRome late in 168.He give us a list ofhis military titles. He held the postof
is known to have served earlier as srrattgos of the archisomatophylax or 'head bodyguard', which if
ThebaId, butwas summonedto Alexandrialatein 170, converted into modem parlance mightbeuanslatedas
probablyinpreparationforthewar. Nowneniosleftthe theequivalentof'seniorstaffofficer'. Heisalsonamed
military service (W. Peremans & E. Van't Dack, asasquadroncommander(iJarchls)inthepalacecavalry.
Prosopographica(1953)p.50n.6)latein168topreside The other two military titles he holds arc quite
overtheembassytoRome,andheeventuallyrosetothe extraordinary. He is called 'instructor in tactics ofthe
rank ofepistoJagraphos, or head ofchancellery under King'(S\&xoxaAol;'tOO~'t(OVWoICT\KCIlV).In
Ptolemy vm Euergetes 1I (Walbank, Commentary JJl thiscontext,ofcourse,tacticsmeanstheart.ofdrawing
pp. 439,453). Itisextremelyinterestingtonotethatthe upan army, and it ispresumablytheart.ofdrawingup
regimentformerlycommandedbyNowneniosremained the army in the Roman manner with which Kallikles
without an officially appointed successor to the wascharged.TheprecisenatureofhisactivitiesinCyprus
eponymouscommandforarleasttwoyears.Unfortunately is unknown (Leon MooreD, The AuJic ntuJatul'e In
wedonotknowwhetherthisregimentwasoneofcavalry Ptolemaic Egypt (1975) p. 21), but he may well have
orinfantry, andthereforewecannottakethedateof165 visitedtheislandtoreformtheinfantryregimentsofthe
asaterminuspostquem forthe militaryrefonns. garrison there. The final title Kallikles is given is
commander'ofthetroopsoftheleft'. Itshouldbenoted
KaJlikJes son ofKallikles theAlexandrian. thatthereadingisnotentirelysecureatthispointMitford
(BSA 56 (1961)pp. 20-22)conjecturedthatthesewould
Despite Euergetes' short-lived seizure ofpower in the havebeen troopsof'the leftwing' (eOO)vo~vKepaQ,
years 164-3, it is hardly to be doubted that the whichhethoughtmighthavebeen"somefancyfonnation
administration ofPhiJometor instituted these military .. devisedbythisInstructorRoyalintheArtofTactics".
refonns. Whatpart,wemayask,didPhilometorplayon Isuspectratherthatthe'rightwing' mayrefertooneof
apersonal level in theprocess?Polybius(39.7)thought thetwo'wings'intowhichthephalanx.wasdividedalong
that Philometorwas a gentle and good king. He never the 'Asclepiodotan' model,forwhich, aswehaveseen,
put to death any of his friends nor any of tlte there is someevidence inthe Seleucidarmy. Kallikles,
Alexandrians.Infactthiswasperhapsamistake:hewas then, may have been one ofthe two principal infantry
certainly toolenient with hisbrother. We doknowthat commandersinthearmyofPhilometor,and thepostof
inRomePhilometorfound an ardent supporterin Cato squadron commander in the palace cavalry may havc
the Censor, who spoke against Thermus on his behalf beenapurelyhonorificone.
(cf. AJanE. Astin,CatotheCensor(1978)p.270).Cato
mayhavemetPhilometorduringtheking'svisittoRome KalJikles is not otherwise known, and we have no
in 164, and may have been impressed by the young knowledgeofwherehemayhaveacquiredhisknowledge
monarch'scharacter. ofItalian military systems. He may havevisited Rome
personally as an ambassador, and it is even possible,
Polybius also tells us that despite his sensitive nature, thoughunlikely,thathemayhaveservedasamercenary
PhilometorsOO\\"OOcourageandpresenceofmindinboth officerinthewesternMediterranean. Itisperhapsmore
politicalcrisesandonthebattlefield. Hewasextremely likely, though, that he obtained the information he
popular with his troops; a decree set up by his Cretan required to implementthe reformsby interrogatingthe
auxiliaries atDelos calls him"scrupulous, piousandof considerable numberofItalian mercenaries whowould
allmenthemosthumane....showingagreatspiritinall have been serving in the Ptolemaic army at the time.
his dealings" (Walbank, Commentary JII p. 738). The first Egyptian embassy was sent to Rome in 273,
Nevertheless, inview oftheage and lackofexperience and Italians are fOWld in Ptolemaic service from the
ofPhilometor, even though he had personally visited middleofthethirdcenturyonwards(LauneyI.pp. 604·
Rome in 164 when aged about 20, it is hard to believe 8).TheearliestattestedoftheseisoneDinnius.aRo.man,
that Philometor himselfinstituted the 'Roman' reform adimoirittsintheregimentcommandedbyAutomedon
ofthePtolemaicarmy.Fortunatelythereissomeevidence in 252/1 BC. Someofthese Romans could reach quite
tohandgivingusthenameofthepersonwhomayhave highrank. Lucius, sonofGaios,wascommanderoftbe
beenresponsiblefor implementingthesechanges. Ptolemaic garrison stationed at Itanos in Crete during
thereignofPhilopator(217-209 BC).
KalliklessonofKallikJesofAlexandriaisonlyattested
inacoupleofhonorific inscriptionsfrom Cypruswhich
6
ThePtolemalc Manlple. ThePtolemaicCentury.
The new organizational structure is the slmeia, or Thesemeiawasdividedintotwocenturies,presumably
'maniple'. The Greek word used for maniple. a calledhekatontarchial, commanded by hekatontarchoi
'standard', presumably on account ofthere being one 'commandersofa hundred'. All hekatontarths attested.
standard-bearertoeachmaniple,isgenerallyspeltslmeia in thepapyri (PP 2321-2287) have dates in the second
inPtolemaiccontexts,whereasthewordisgenerallyspelt halfofthesecondcentwy. Theearliest,oneNoumenios
semaia in Polybius. The ptolemaic maniple is first (pP2326), isattestedinapapyrusofabout ISOBCfrom
attested in a papyrus which mentions Philippos son of Tebtunis in the Fayoum. After his name comes the
Sogenes, a private soldier (straridles) in thesemeia of paleographicsignrho (P),whichstandsforthenumber
Pu[..]r6sstationed inMemphis (UPZ 18,S) in 163 BC. lOO in the Greek alphabetic system of numeration. It
Theofficialterminologyforaprivatesoldierduringthis waspointedoutbyWLlcken(UPZ 2p. S6)thatthissign
period, the terminological equivalent of the Latin standsforcenturionindocumentsoftheRomanperiod,
gregarlus,wasthereforepresumablystralJ6res,thetenn and that this is how it must be interpreted in this
idiores does, however, also occur in military contexts docwnent.despitetheearlydate.Anundatedpapyusfrom
(Pros. Ptol. 3813,3920). A alternative reading ofthe Tebtunis, which must. however,datetoaroundthe 1605
same papyrus has been suggested which would make (seetheparagraphbelow),mentionsasoldier"fromthe
Philippos a private soldier in the sixth maniple of troopscommandedbyPolycrates,ofthe 8th. centuryof
Pu[..]rOs(ZPE52(1983)p.271).Thisseemspreferable, theMacedonianAgema"(SBI4318,2).Ifthisdocument
as the maniples were normally referred to by their is correctly read, it is aunique example ofnumeration
number, and the personal name given is that of the by centuries rather than maniples. Perhaps the
regimental officer in charge ofa number ofmaniples. phenomenonofnumberingbycenturieswasconfinedto
Forexamplewefindone 'Ptollisstandard-bearerofthe guard units.
secondsemela' (PP2388). Apartfromdubiousreadings
or interpretations ofan 'eleventh' and a 'twenty-first' Under the centurion were two penlekontarehoi
maniple in the papyri, the highest numberattested for 'commanders offifty', in charge ofa unit which was
anymanipleinthepapyriorinscriptionsissix(ZPE52 presumably called a pentekontarchia. Prosopographla
(l983)p. 270).Itseemsreasonabletosupposethatthere Ptolemaica listsa large numberofholdersofthisrank
werenormallysixslmeiaiintheregiment;aspeculation (2333-2366)datingtobothbeforeandafterthe 1605.If:,
which is confirmed by the }ouget and Roeder stelai however, all the examples earlier than the 160s are
discussedinAppendixH.Inbattletheywouldpresumably examined, it isfound thattheyareall includedbecause
fonnupinatriplexacies'chequerboard' fonnationt"..O they havethe Greekletterspen- aftertheirnameinthe
manipleswideandthreedeep. original document, indicating their rank. The early
editorsofthesepapyrirestoredpen-aspen[takosicudlos]
The system ofnumeration by maniple was not applied 'commander offive hundred', or pen[tekontarchos]
in an entirely regular manner, however, for a group of 'commander of fifty' at will. When all examples of
papyri dating to between 158 and 156 BC refer restorations of the letters pen- are removed from the
indiscriminatelytothesameunit,stationedinMemphis, listing ofpcntekontarchsinPros. Ptol., it is found that
to which an ouragos named Argaios belonged, as the allbelongtothemiddleofthesecondcenturyorlater.It
semeia of Dexilaos or the first semela (Van t'Dack, is evident that the letters pen- should be restored. as
Pto/emaieaSeleetap.72n.34). Vant'Dack(Ptolemajea pen[takosiarchos] in all cases. When the rank ofthe
Se/eela pp. 65-84) hassuggestedthat the demotictenn pentekontarchisgivenbyapaleographicsymbol,aswith
stnistheEgyptiantennfortheGreekslmeia.Thetenn thehekatontarch,thealphabeticGreeknumberfor50is
stn iscertainlyusedasanequivalent toslmeio in those given,inthiscasetheletternu(v).Theearliestexample
examples given byvan t'Oack which havea dale after (Pros. Pto/. 2362)isapentek:ontarehofthetroopsunder
theintroductionofthesemeiain the 16Os,butanumber Polykrates, a regiment which hasjust been mentioned
ofother examples use the tenn srn before this date in lhe paragraph above, who isattested in a document
(sometimes ofcavalry units). Therefore it should be from Tebtunis in the Fayoum dating to 162 BC. No
assumedthatthetennisusedwiththemeaning'military subordinate officers are attested below pente.kontareh.
company' and is used ofsemeia after the 1605, but is but it is possible that thepenukontarchiawas divided
earlier used oftaxis or ofsome similar term(s) for an intoanumberoftent-parties.
infantrysub-unit.
7
ManipularStaff. phalanx comes in a papyrus dated to 29th. July 127.
whichmentionsagramma/eus(secretary)"ofthephalanx
The Latin term for the 'staff' of the maniple was over which Polianthes holds command". He has also
pl'incipales, a termwhichdistinguished themfrom the noted that there is a grammatical inconsistency in the
gregal'ii, or private soldiers. As we have seen the document,for"which" isintheplural. Henotesthatin
'Asclepiodotan' term for these officers, which may Asclepiodotus (2.10) the 'ideal' army consists offour
represent late Seleucid practice, was ek/aktoi. In phalangarchiai, the equivalent ofthe legion, grouped
Ptolemaicusagethe term used for these 'staff' washoi into two diphalangiai or 'wings', and a then single
em
tare~n (o~e.;CJ.)'t~v)or ..thoseoutsidetheranks". phalanx, but both Aelian and Arrian (9.10) give
Current explanations ofthis and related terms are not telraphanangarchiaasanalternativetermforthewhole
entirelysatisfactory(Vant'Dack,Ptolemaica&lec/app. infantryforceinsteadofphalanx.Presumablythereason
65--84), and theycan onlybe understoodinthecontext for this was that in common usage the terms
ofthe 'Romanization' ofthe latePtolemaicarmy. phalangarchia and phalanx were interchangeable. Van
!'Dack has suggested that the papyrus should perhaps
TheoUl'agos,slmeiophoros,klnaandhypire/esareall bereadwiththenumber4infront ofPhalanx.whichis
attested,butnotthetrumpeter.TheLefebvreStelefrom tobeunderstoodasshorthandforsayingthatPolinathes
Hermopolis, which is fully discussed in Appendix H, commandeda unit calleda 'rerraphalanx'.
informs us that each of the slmeio has a berald, a
standard-bearer, andanoUl'ogos. All theoUl'ogoi listed Perhaps,notwithstandingthegrammar,itmightbebest
inthepapyriarelate,exceptfor(Pros. Ptol. 2369)dating to understand the information in the papyrus aseither
to 248r! BC, which relies on the interpretation ofthe suggesting that the term phalanx could be used as an
letters0\)assignifyingOl.){pa.')'Ol;J.However,apreferable alternative to syntaxis, or that a number ofsynlareis
interpretation ofthese two letters would simply be to formed a phalanx. The Ptolemaic phalanx is thus the
regardthemastheGreeknegative01.) 'no'(FritzUebel, equivalent ofthe Asclepiodotanphalangarchia and of
Die klel'uehen Agyptens unler den erslen seehs theRoman legion. Ifmyinterpretationofthetitulature
Plolemdern (1968) p. 205 n. 4). The earliest of the ofKallikJessonofKallikJesiscolTCC't,anumberofthese
standard-bearers (Pros. Plol. 2379-89) is Korax son of phalanxes, officially two, would then constitute one of
Dionysiosslmlophoros ofthose troops.under Pasinos. the two 'wings' ofthe heavy infantryasa whole. Later
attested in a papyrus from Hermoupolis Magna dating on in the same papyrus the term hegemonia isusedof
to 7143n BC (Pros. Ptol. 2385; er. Winnicki p. 13). the unit which is commandedby Polianthes. The term
The military ranks ofklrux(Pros. Ptol. 2390-2399) or literallymeans'command',andisprobablyatermwhich
stratolferur 'army-herald' and hypere/es (Pros. Ptol. wasused looselyfor a numberoflevelsofcommand. It
2435-1452)both existed before the army reform ofthe is possible, however, that it was sometimes used
16Os. specifically for the regiment, called a syn/aris in the
LefebvreStele(cf. Vant'Dack,P/olemaico&lec/ap.55
HigherFormations, n.21).
FrominformationsuppliedbytheLefebvrestele,which OtherReformsofPhilometor.
isfully discussedinAppendixH,wecanreconstructthe
organizationofaninfantryregiment,whichisseemingly Otherrefonns inthe administrationoftheEmpire may
called a syntaxis in that document. The regiment was alsohavebeencarriedoutduringthereignofPhilometor.
commandedbyan officercalled a hegemon ep'ondron, but if so we are poorly informed about them.
and the regimental headquarters included a clerk Papyrological evidence from the village ofKerkeosiris
(gramma/eus) who was perhaps the eqivalent of the intheFayoumindicatesthatitwasonlyaround 150BC
'Regimental Sergeant-Major', two other 'Warrant thatc1eruchicsettlementpickedupagainafteranalmost
Officers' (Mgemoneser~laxe~n)anda'Staff-Sergeant' completebreakofthirtyyears. Crawford(Kerkeosirisp.
(er6 rare6n), who was perhaps properly called the 61) has noted that during the troubled early years of
hypere/es. Philometor's reign the army would have been on
continualcallforserviceandtheauthoritieswouldhave
We have no firm knowledge ofany military formation beentoooccupiedtoconcernthemselveswiththepeaceful
higherthanthesynlaxis.Vant'Dack(Prolemoico&lecla settlement of troops. Many of the mercenaries first
p. 55) has noted that a single reference to the word contracted for service during the Sixth Syrian War in
8
the late 1705, and further contingents of mercenaries Philometor'sreign(Lesquierp.76),andcompletecontrol
contractedsubsequentlyduringthecivilwarsofthe160s ofthe UpperNilewas placed in his hands. Philomctor
'would now havebeen in continuous service for twenty also attempted to extend the southernborderdown the
years or more, and would be eager candidates for Nile.Boethus,sonofNicostratos,aCarian,whoisknown
demobilizationintothecleruchicreserveifthisinvolved tohaveheldtheofficeofepisrrat2gosoftheThebaidin
thedouceurofanallottment. thelastyearofPhilometor'sreign,wasgiventhetaskof
founding two new towns on the border named
Thenativerevolts ofUpperEgyptduringtheearlypart PhilometorisandCleopatra.Herodes,sonofDemophon
ofPhilometor'sreignhaddemonstratedthe importance held the post ofgarrison~mmanderat Syene on the
ofconsolidating military control over this part ofthe First Cataract, and was governor ofthis border region
kingdom. A new office, that of epistrat2gos, or (Bevan, Egyptp. 294).
'generalissimo' of the Thebai'd was created during
Diag. 6. Comparison ofMilitary Terms
RomanTerm PolybianTerm AsclepiodotanTerm PtolemaicTerm
tribune chiliarches (6.19.7) chi/iarches
legion meros (6.19.7) phalangarchia phalanx?
cchort speira (11.23.1) chiliarchia syntaxis?
maniple smaia (6.24.8) syntagma semeia
cenllJrion taxiarchos(6.24) hekatontarchesltaxiarchos hekatontarches
century taxis(6.24) taxis hekatontarchia7
optio ouragos (6.24.2) ouragos ouragos
standard-bearer semaiaphoros (6.24.6) semeiophoros semeiophoros
pentekontarchia Diag. 7. Probable Organization ofaptolemaicInfantryRegiment
pentekontarehes
641
hekatontarchia
hekatontarches 1stsemeia
128?
pcntekontarchia
pcntekontarches 2ndsemeia
641 3rdsi:meia syntaxis?
Mgemonep'andron
256+7officers
1,536?+43officers
+4staff
+22staff
t 4thsemeia t
+ +
pentekontarchia hoiexotaxe6n grammateus
pentekontarches k1~----- 5thsemeia hegemonex6taxe6n
641 hegemonex6taxe6n
semeiophoros
(hypSretes)eX<'!taxeon
ouragos
hekatontarehia "SonsofOfficers"
hekatontarchcs 6thsemeia
1281
pentekontarchia
pentekontarchh
641
9