Becoming King
Herod the Great, living from either 74 or 73 BCE, to 4 BCE, was king of Judea (roughly modern Israel), from 37 BCE to 4 BCE. Herod was not of royal blood, and his family came from Idumaea, the lowland area of southern Israel.
His father was Antipater the Idumaean, one of the most powerful advisers to the King of Judea, Alexander Jannaeus living from 101 BCE - 76 BCE. On Alexanders death the kingdom was left to his wife, Salome Alexander, to rule as regent for their infant son Hyrcanus II. When Salome died, a civil war broke out between Hyrcanus II, supported by Antipater, and Hyrcanus' brother, Aristobulus. Both brothers requested aid from Pompey (completing his eastern conquests at the time), and Pompey chose Hyrcanus to be king, with Pompey invading and defeating Aristobulus at Jerusalem in 63 BCE. Hyrcanus II was installed as high priest, not king, and was thus forth subject to Roman rule as a client king (mostly under the control of the governors of Syria. In 57 BCE Hyrcanus was forced to call upon the Roman governor of Syria, Galbinus, to quash a revolt against the high priest. After doing this, Galbinus split Judea into 5 autonomous regions, each paying official fealty to Hyrcanus, but realistically being largely independent. Under this new system, Antipater rose to realistically control Judea (although from behind the scenes and official authority of the high priest).
In 48 BCE, at Antipaters urging, Hyrcanus sided with Caesar, after Caesar beat his rival Pompey in the Roman civil war. This was a very smart move as only with Rome's backing could Judea survive, and after Caesar beat Pompey in 48 BCE at Pharsalus, Caesar basically was Rome, the ultimate authority in the Mediterranean. Jewish soldiers even helped Ceasar when he was besieged within Alexandria in 47 BCE. For these actions, Hyrcanus was given the title of 'ethnarch' and 'friend of Rome'. 'ethnarch', is equivalent to the ruler of a nation, and so this was an improvement upon Hrycanus' old title of high priest.
In 44 BCE Herod first appears, awarded the governorship of Galilee, and made a 'strategoi'. Herod displayed a fine knowledge of war, capturing a bandit leader called Ezekias, and executing him. In 43 BCE Antipater was murdered (probably with the endorsement of Hyrcanus) by a certain Malichus. Herod avenged his father by killing Malichus, displaying his iron will.
However at around 42 BCE Judea fell under a new master, Marc Antony, who was now ruler of the Eastern Roman provinces. Antony failed to protect Judea and in 40 BCE the Parthians attacked and installed Aristobulus' son, Mattatihu Antigonus II, as king of Judea. Herod's family were besieged by Antigonus at their fortress of Masada, so Herod headed to Rome to seek support.
In Rome Herod was pronounced King of the Jews, and he returned, spending the next three years up to 37 BCE reconquering Judea.
Herod, over his reign, would embark on various military campaigns, such as the reconquest of Judea, and the 2 Nabatean wars (which included a battle against a Ptolemaic army surprisingly)
(The Herodian kingdom, slightly larger than modern Israel)
Organisation of the Army
The army of Herod was a hybrid Hellenic (Greek) and Roman army. This means that it fielded considerable heavily armed and armoured cavalry contingents, the Greek aspect, but also Roman influences of heavy infantry organised in a similarly Roman manner. The various units were banded into units that can be recognised in other armies.
The Herodian 'ile' of 200 men, was primarily a cavalry unit, but could as easily be represented by light infantry. This is a very Greek formation, as their cavalry was usually grouped into large units, whereas the Roman units were very small, usually a squadron was made of 30 men. This difference is doubtless representative of the cavalry focus the Greek and Eastern world had, compared to the Roman infantry focus.
The 'lochos' was similar to a Roman 'cohort' and included around 512 heavy infantrymen.
The 'meros' was a close model of the Roman legion, although instead of 5,000 men, the Herodian 'meros' was around 3,000 men. We know of one particular 'meros' of heavy infantry called the 'sebastenoi', that was almost a copy of Roman infantry, equipped with sword, mail armour, a helmet, and a large 'scutum' shield. This unit differed from Roman infantry of the time in that they still carried a regular spear, whereas the Romans carried 2 javelins called 'pila'.
A very unique unit among the Herodian army, not ever seen in the Roman army, was the 'telos' made up of 2,000 light infantry. This was most likely due to Judea possessing people who were renowned skirmishers, and the Romans having a small reliance on such light troops.
The ranks of Herod's army are largely unknown, but show considerable Roman influence in function, however they are Greek in title.
Herod was overall commander, with the Greek title 'basileus', meaning King. This is extremely Hellenistic in fashion, and it was not typical of Roman consuls or governors of this period to lead their armies personally (however this came back to prominence around the late 3rd century CE.
The other high ranking officers of Herod's army seem to have been either occupied by his family, or by Roman officers. There is a possibility that these Romans were sent by Augustus to advise Herod, or they could also be Roman exiles (accentuated by large numbers of the defeated Marc Antony's supporters roaming the republic and beyond); but there is also the possibility that these men were simply Roman mercenaries, looking for employ. The officers of Herod's family include Joseph, Herod's brother, originally sent to reconquer their homeland of Idumaea from Antigonus. Herod's cousin Achiab is said to have been a commander in the civil war after Herod's death in 4 BCE, and doubtlessly served during Herod's reign. Costobar was a prominent Idumaean who was an officer (but of unknown rank and responsibilities). The Romans in the army were Volumnius, the 'stratopedarch' of Herod's army charged with siege works and the building of temporary camps. There was Rufus, who was charged with the 'sebastenoi', and Gratus, who commanded the 'sebastenoi' cavalry.
Size
The army of Herod varied in size during his campaigns from 39 BCE - 4 BCE. However estimates can be made for the various dates and campaigns Herod ventured on.
In 39 BCE it seems likely that Herod's army numbered 5,000 men. This can be seen as Herod gave his brother Joseph 2,400 soldiers to retake Idumea, and some days later Herod marched on Galilee with 1,700 soldiers. However garrisons were likely stationed elsewhere, driving the number up. By the siege of Jerusalem in 37 BCE Herod had between 10,000 and 12,000 soldiers. By the end of the siege Herod would likely have had 25,000 men (due to his increased resources with which to buy mercenaries). The Romans also contributed heavily to the opening campaigns of Herod, and Antony had sent Machaeras, with 8,000 infantry (2 legions) and 1,000 cavalry. Later, Antony sent another 2 legions with auxiliaries, commanded by Sosius. By the end of the siege of Jerusalem there were 30,000 Roman troops in Judea, however they would be withdrawn in time when Herod had a sufficient force of his own.
In 32 BCE, only 5 years after the siege of Jerusalem, Antony ordered Herod to attack the Nabateans (modern Jordan). We are not told the numbers of Herod's army but are told the enemy numbers amounted to 30,000. It is thus likely that Herod's army had changed little since Jerusalem and stayed at the 25,000 (Herod was unlikely to disband his army so shortly into his insecure reign)
At his death in 4 BCE, Herod's army fractured. This was because Herod, like Hannibal, Caesar and Pyrrhus before him, galvanised his army with his strong personality alone, and so when he died, many of the troops (who had personal ties of loyalty to him, or simply were in his pay) split between 2 factions in Judea or just went home. The factions, quickly as this is not the topic at hand, were Herod's legitimate but deeply disliked son Archelaus, and a revolt of the Jewish population. Archelaus commanded the 'meros' of the 'sebastenoi' along with their Roman commanders Rufus and Gratus, as well as an 'ile' of cavalry. In addition Archelaus commanded the 'meros' of the royal guard, and 1,500 men under Herod's cousin Achias. This means that Archelaus had 7,700 soldiers altogether, mostly coming from the noble aspects of Herod's army. The rebels had the common Jewish elements, made up of 10,000 veterans of Herod's army. This gives a strength of around 18,000 troops in Herod's army, but there was a large reserve contingent of colonists, making up another 13,000 military personnel. This, overall, puts the Herodian army just after Herod's death at around 30,000 men, larger than ever before (however this is because the army had seen men retire and join the reservists, and new full time soldiers took their place).
(Herod is typically represented as an autocratic tyrant, however this has been proven to be somewhat untrue, as though he was an autocrat, Herod sponsored great prosperity in Judea)
Composition
The composition of the Herodian army was largely Hellenic with very Roman influences. The majority of Herod's army, contrary to popular belief, was actually Jewish. However the army had large foreign contingents of Babylonians, Celts, Galatians, Germans, and Thracians.
The royal guard of Herod was the elite of his army and formed around 2,000 men, but likely increased to 3,000 around his death. The royal guard had several detachments, such as a German contingent, Celtic/Galatian contingent, and Thracian contingent. It is said that the German contingent was modelled on Augustus' German bodyguards, the 'germani corporis custodes'. This unit was, for Augustus, a 'cohort' or 500 men strong, and was on foot for patrolling the palace but in battle was mounted. This may mean that Herod's was also 500 soldiers, and if this is the case it is likely that the other contingents were 500 strong. This is accentuated when considering that after Cleopatra committed suicide, Augustus gave her 400 strong Galatian bodyguard unit to Herod. If this is true and all foreign units had 'lochos' strength, that means Herod's royal bodyguard was 1,500 men strong; however this leaves a unit out. The remainder of the soldiers of the guardsmen came from a unit called the 'doryphoroi'. Little is known about this unit, but it probably was formed of Jewish nobility.
Herod always placed an importance on cavalry, and tried to always deploy them at a 1:5 relation to the infantry. Herod's 'sebastenoi' was deployed at 500 cavalry and 3,000 cavalry, 1:6, however the Roman assistance sent in 57 BCE was 1,000 cavalry and 8,000 infantry, a 1:8 ratio (displaying the lack of importance the Romans placed on cavalry). There is little known about Hero's cavalry but it almost definitely included cataphracts, in addition the light cavalry we do know of. There is evidence of a cavalry unit of 500 in the Babylonian fashion (fast, and carrying a bow), under the command of Zamaris.
Herod's infantry formed the bulk of his army, and was highly effective. The infantry was formed mostly by both light and heavy infantry, with little usage of medium infantry. The light infantry was mostly Itruraean archers, which were apparently well known across the middle east and the heavy infantry were mostly Jewish, armed in the Roman fashion. The 'sebastenoi' have been discussed at length already but basically they were 3,000 heavy infantry that were armed almost identically to the Romans (and after Herod's death they formed Roman auxiliaries).
(Left, is Zamaris, commander of the Babylonian cavalry. Middle is King Herod in his armour. Right is a heavy infantryman of the 'sebastenoi')
Conclusion
In conclusion, it is clear that Herod's army was Roman in structure and unit type, but Jewish in personnel. The use of terms like 'lochos' are so similar in meaning to 'cohort' and 'meras' to 'legion' that it is hard to dispute this. Herod's army was highly effective, professional, and cost effective (although the exact figures are not know, it certainly did not break the bank for Herod). The army was ultimately all loyal to Herod, and upon his death its loyalties split, as happens so often with charismatic leaders. The army of Herod is an often hidden part of history but I do not see why, as it is as interesting and deserving of investigation as even the great Roman army is.
Thank you for reading this, I hope you enjoyed it. My next articles will be based on overlooked ancient armies, but please do give me suggestions. Max Scourfield.
Comments