Philip II and Alexander the Great: Father and Son ... - Historia Antigua

THE ARGEADS AND THE PHALANX 99
as the king’s bodyguard and were called “Foot Companions.” Here
there is a contradiction, but only an apparent one. It looks as though
the royal footguards were originally a small, select group, which was
vastly expanded at some stage. The wider body of infantry now had
the title which had previously been the preserve of the elite guard,
and the entire infantry was, in effect, a huge bodyguard for the king.
But which king? According to Harpocration, Anaximenes mentioned
the army organization in Book I of his Philippika with reference to an
Alexander. 41 This has sparked unending debate with practically every
Macedonian monarch canvassed except the most obvious. Brunt 42
opted for Alexander I (the Philhellene), who, he suggests, was elevated
into a culture hero, the spiritual founder of the Macedonian
state. More adventurously, Griffi th thought that a case could be made
for Alexander the Great, based on the passage of Anaximenes that he
roundly condemns. 43 Others have suggested Philip, who is seen as the
ruler most capable of revolutionizing the Macedonian army, even
though Anaximenes explicitly ascribed the restructuring to an
Alexander. In my opinion, the most likely candidate is Alexander II,
the eldest son of Amyntas III and brother of Philip, who reigned
briefl y from the death of his father in 370 until his assassination in
368/7. For many commentators this has ruled out Alexander II. In
their view, he was too young to carry out such a radical reform and he
shows no sign of military brilliance. None of this is conclusive. Alexander
had probably been accepted as crown prince during the lifetime
of his father. The two are named together in an Athenian decree
of the late 370s, 44 and by that time Alexander would have reached
maturity. On his accession he was active militarily, intervening in
Thessaly in support of the Aleuad clan of Larisa and provoking retaliation
from Thebes. 45 At this stage, he was challenged for the throne
by his relative, Ptolemy of Alorus, and a second pretender, Pausanias,
was able to occupy a few cities to the east of the kingdom which he
turned into a small principality where he is said to have enjoyed the
favor of the local populace. 46 The year of troubles culminated in
Alexander’s assassination in 368. 47 This is clearly relevant to the military
organization. Alexander was hard pressed by domestic and foreign
enemies and had every reason to win and sustain his popularity
with the troops. What is more, he had observed the Theban army at
close quarters in 369, when Pelopidas entered Macedon and struck
up a friendship with the young king. He could well have been infl uenced
by their tactics in action and organized his own men in fi les of
ten. Given the threat from Ptolemy and Pausanias, it would have been
a clever populist move to extend the title of Foot Companion to the
entire infantry.