The Theseia in Late Hellenistic Athens Author(s): Glenn Richard Bugh Source: Zeitschrift fr Papyrologie und Epigraphik, Bd.

83 (1990), pp. 20-37 Published by: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20187330 . Accessed: 16/03/2011 20:21
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at . http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=habelt. . Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Dr. Rudolf Habelt GmbH, Bonn (Germany) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Zeitschrift fr Papyrologie und Epigraphik.

http://www.jstor.org

20

THE THESEIA IN LATE HELLENISTIC ATHENS

The saga of Theseus, legendary king of Athens, is a full and rich one.1 But only certain events of his life concern us here, specifically the circumstances of his death, the recovery of his bones and the creation of a state cult in his honor in the 470s. Plutarch in his Ufe of Theseus records thatKimon son ofMiltiades attacked the island of Skyros in 476/5, expelled the native Dolopians, infamous for their piratical activities, and colonized the island with
Athenians ridding (36.1-4; the Aegean Kimon of notorious 8.3-7; cf. Thuc. 1.98.2). But this is not just a story about in had and asserting Athenian naval involved Theseus

pirates

supremacy; to legend,

this adventure,

as cause

or effect,2

is a Delphic

oracle.

According

become embroiled in a power struggle in Athens, fled to Skyros where he had ancestral estates, and was treacherously pushed off a cliff to his death by Lykomedes, king of the island. Centuries had passed, but Apollo had not forgotten. After the Persian wars, it seems, the Athenians received an oracle from Delphi instructing them to recover Theseus' bones and return them to Athens for proper heroic burial. When the Dolopians proved obstructive, Kimon reduced the island. Aided by an eagle, Kimon located a tomb on Skyros containing the remains of a gigantic man. He promptly identified him as Theseus, and returned the sacred bones to Athens.
processions and sacrifices and placed

The Athenians
in a sacred

received

these with

splendid

them

enclosure

in the center

of the city.

This Theselon,
Theseus 36.2),

described as being near the Gymnasium

is likely to be located at a site east or southeast

of Ptolemy

(Paus. 1.17.2; Plut.

agora below the

of the ancient

north slope of theAcropolis.3 Scattered sources confirm that a state festival was instituted in honor of Theseus at this time and that it took place on 8 Pyanopsion (October in the Julian

1 See H. Herter, 'Theseus', RE Supplement Theseus (London: 1970).

xiii (1973) cols. 1045-1238

and A.G. Ward

(ed.), Quest for

2 Plutarch's accounts in Theseus andKimon are ambiguous on this point. Of course, divine justification for is an old and familiar theme; cf. Paus. 1.17.6. aggression 3 For testimonia and discussion see R.E. Wycherley, The Athenian Agora iii: Literary and Epigraphical Testimonia (Princeton: 1957) pp. 113-147, E. Vanderpool, 'The "Agora" of Pausanias 1,17,1-2', Hesperia 43 The S.N. Koumanoudis, 'eHZEQZ zhkoz', AE (1976) pp.194-216, R.E. Wycherley, (1974) pp.308-310, 'The Theseion: A Slave Refuge', AJAH 9 Stones of Athens (Princeton: 1978) p.64 and K.A. Christensen, (1984 [1988]) pp.23-32.

The Theseia inLate Hellenistic Athens

21

calendar).4 Accounts of the Treasurers of Athena for 332/1 and 331/0 BC (IG ii2 1496,134 135,143) show that theTheseia had become amajor state festival in theClassical period: (a) 1183 drachmas were disbursed in 332/1, an amount greater than that allocated for the Lesser Panathenaia of the previous year5 (the figure for 332/1 is not preserved), and (b) its presence in two consecutive years proves that itwas celebrated annually. What is not known is the nature and extent of the athletic program of the Theseia in theClassical period. There are, of course, the Theseia inscriptions of the second century BC, IG ii2 956-965, the topic of this paper. But it is perilous to argue, as E.N. Gardiner did,6 that on the basis of the "religious
conservatism of the Greeks" these documents "may be considered as representing the general

character of the festival in the fifth century, and that such changes as had been introduced were merely changes in details". In fact, we will have occasion later to suggest that the athletic program detailed in the second century BC represents a significant new festival. What then are these Theseia inscriptions and what can they tell us about lateHellenistic Athens? I have examined all of the stones in the Epigraphical Museum inAthens, except 963 and 965, which could not be located. If we may generalize from our best-preserved stones, 956, 957 and 958, each Theseia was recorded on a free-standing stele approximately two
meters tall, over 0.50 meters wide, and approximately 0.20 meters thick, and judging from

958, surmounted by a pediment with three acroteria. Inscriptions 956, 957, 958, 960, 962 and 964 are of grey Hymettan marble; 959 and 961 of Pentelic. The provenience of 956-958
is of special interest. These were uncovered, along with sculptures depicting Theseus and

theMinotaur, by S. Koumanoudes in 1861 while excavating the Post-Herulian wall near the church of St. Demetrios Katephores (no longer standing), approximately 200 meters east of the Roman market.7 Vanderpool
ought to be located nearby.

suggested, and I think quite rightly, that the Theseion

know that the stelae were set up in the t?menos of

For we

4 Plut. Theseus 36.4, Kimon 8.6; for date and discussion see A. Mommsen, Feste der Stadt Athen im Altertum (Leipzig: 1898) pp.288-298, L. Deubner, Attische Feste (Berlin: 1932) pp.224-226, J.D. Mikalson, The Sacred and Civil Calendar of theAthenian Year (Princeton: 1975) pp.70-71, H.W. Parke, Festivals of the Athenians (Ithaca: 1977) pp.81-82 and D.G. Kyle, Athletics in Ancient Athens (Leiden: 1987) pp.40-41 (hereafter Kyle, Athletics). 5 See Mommsen, op.cit. pp.291-292. (London: 1910) pp.246-247; note the cautionary words by Kyle,

6 Greek Athletic Sports and Festivals Athletics pp.40-41. 7 See Vanderpool, op.cit. p.309 (Princeton: 1988) pp. 137-138.

and A. Frantz, The Athenian

Agora xxiv: Late Antiquity: AD 267-700

22

G.R.

Bugh

Theseus, iv t?u

tov 6r)o-?v>s

re^?vei

(956,16-17;

957,11; 958, 13-14).

The inscriptions record public decrees in honor of the agonothetai of the Theseia. Following a decree detailing the liturgical generosity and administrative skill of the agonothete are lists of the victors in the games, inscribed in two columns. Not surprisingly,
the agonothetai come from well-known and well-to-do families of late Hellenistic Athens:8

Nikogenes son of Nikon of the deme Philaidai (956; PA 10850); Miltiades son of Zoilos of the deme Marathon (958; PA 10215); Leon son of Kichesias of the deme Aixone (960; PA 9108, NPA p.117); [Apolexis son of Lysa]nder of the deme Peiraieus (961; PA 1363); and Buttakos son of Purrhos of the deme Lamptrai (963; PA 2934, NPA p.43). What then of the athletic program itself?9 The first events were competitions for trumpeters and heralds. Then followed categories of military reviews termed euandria and euoplia, nicely defined by Gardiner10 as "general smartness and equipment".11 Three military groups competed in these events: the picked troops (hoi epilektoi), the foreign troops (hoi en tols ethnesln) and theAthenian cavalry. Native troops competed by tribes, foreigners by tagmata. Torch races followed these competitions. The participants were divided into classes of youths (paldes), ephebes, ex-ephebes, young men (neaniskoi), men, and occasionally horsemen.12 The paides are actually identified as belonging to a specific palaistra; e.g., of Timeas (9561, 61-62; 957 I, 46-47; 9611, 25-26) or Antigenes (958 I, 60 61); the neaniskoi to gymnasia; e.g., the Lyceum (9561,67; 9581,65; 9611,31-32).13

8 See G.R. Bugh, The Horsemen of Athens (Princeton: 1988) p.204 for comments on the hippie activities of these agonothetai. For full prosopography of Leon son of Kichesias see Ch. Habicht, Studien zur Geschichte Athens in hellenistischer Zeit (Hypomnemata 73; G?ttingen: 1982) pp. 194-197. 9 For the hippie events see M.A. Martin, Les cavaliers ath?niens (Paris: 1886) pp.211-225; for the whole see Gardiner, op.cit. pp.245-248, Mommsen, program op.cit. pp.292-298, Herter, op.cit. cols. 1227-1228, Parke, op.cit p.82 andKyle, Athletics pp.40-41 and 178-194 (succinct descriptions of individual agones). 10 Op.cit. p.247. sequence of contests in the Theseia is consistently maintained trumpeters and heralds compete after themilitary reviews. 11 The except for IG ii2 957 where the

12The cavalry does not participate until IG ii2 958 I, 67-68 and later only by the specialized cavalry units called tarantinoi (9601,33-34; 9611,34-35); they also accompanied the Pythais toDelphi later in the second century: FD iii.2 nos.24, 28, 35, 37.3 and 46; see Bugh, op.cit. pp. 197-198. 13 In IG ii2 9571,51 the representatives of theLyceum are andres, not neaniskoi.

The Theseia inLate Hellenistic Athens

23

The remainder of the events can be neatly divided into two broad categories: gymnastic and equestrian. The gymnastic program included the long race (dolichos), the sprint (stadion), the double stade (diaulos), wrestling (pate),14 boxing (pygme), the pankration, race in armor (ottXCttiv),15 limited tomen, "armed combat" (hoplomachia), and the javelin throw (akontlzon), the last reserved for ephebes (957 n, 62-63; 958 n, 77-78). The armed combat event was apparently not introduced until the Theseia of IG ii2 957 (II, 147-157) and took two forms based on theweapons used: (a) round shield and spear (kv do-mSCcoi S?pa-rO and (b) oval shield and broadsword (ev ?vpc kc? i Kai iuax<*?pa016 The competitors for these events included five separate age-class divisions: three age-classes of
paides, The an open division (ek panton) for them, and a men's class, also open to foreigners. tt^? -npo?T^g feature is for the three age-classes rjXtKCa?, tt^s TpCrrjs of boys were Y^Xtiaas. it at Ses An

precise

terminologies SevTepas

Y^XcicCa?, ttj?

interesting

that the first two age-classes of boys were excluded from the long race, the competitors limited topaides third age-class, paides ekpanton,11 andmen. If we compare the victor-lists of the Panathenaic games of this period, we find that the competitors in the dolichos included only boys (paides) andmen.18 Yet therewas also a third age-group in the Panathenaia, the "beardless youths" (ageneioi), but apparently no dolichos reserved for them. I thinkwe can assume that theAthenians expected the ageneioi to compete under the general paides heading and that theywould ordinarily dominate the event because of their advanced age and physical

14For the so-called "heavy events", wrestling, boxing and the pankration, see M. Poliakoff, Studies in the 146; Meisenheim: 1982), and Terminology of Greek Combat Sports (Beitr?ge zur klassischen Philologie recently Combat Sports in theAncient World (Ithaca: 1987). 15 956II, 77-78; 957 n, 46; 958 II, 66; 960II, 27-28; for Panathenaia cf. 2314II, 66 and 2315 I, 15.

16 In IG ii2 957 themachaira is omitted, but judging by 958II, 69 and 73 it can be assumed in 957. Besides, the ephebes also participated in this event (957 II, 61), making it rather unlikely that they fought with shield alone. The thureos and machaira are sometimes translated inmodem literature as "oblong shield" and "short sword", but Dr. N.V. Sekunda (now with the LGPN project inOxford) informs me per litteras that (1) despite the normal meaning of thureos as "door", it is not really "oblong" but rather "oval" in shape, and (2) the type of machaira referred to here is Celtic in origin and has been attested 75-80 cm. in length, and therefore cannot be considered "short"; also, it acquires its Greek appellation from its function as a cutting (or slashing) - as opposed to thrusting weapon. Thus, Sekunda proposes to translate machaira as "broadsword" and I have followed him in this. My sincere thanks toDr. Sekunda for this information. 17 See 956 1,72-73; 957 I, 57-58; 958 I, 71-72; 961, 38-39; 964, 19. Also, it has been restored at 962,4-5 Ch. P?l?kidis, Histoire de V?ph?bie attique des origines ? 31 avant J?sus-Christ (Paris: 1962) p.232 n.l by (hereafter P?l?kidis, ?ph?bie). 18 IG ii2 2313, 21 and 41; 2315, 11 and 33, incidentally, all foreigners.

24

G.R.

Bugh

conditioning.19 In the equestrian competitions, there were events for race horses (lamproi hippoi),

chariots and possibly the chariot and hoplite tandem (apobates). The bulk of the program,
however, was dominated by the Athenian cavalry. They include separate contests for

officers (phylarchs) and the rank and file; these are paralleled in contemporary Panathenaic inscriptions (2316, 28-41; 2317, 6-18). Sometimes riding horses decked out for war
(ittttc?i iToXeiuio-T?iO, sometimes not, the phylarchs and hippeis compete over the

diaulos and straight courses (akampios) distances.20 Limited to the phylarchs was a diaulos
race in which the officer competed "in armor" (kv ottXois).21 There were open equestrian

competitions (ekpanton) as well as one, javelin-throwing on horseback, which appears only in this category (956II, 90-91; 957 II, 83; 958 n, 95-96). My discussion will concentrate on 956, 957 and 958, our best-preserved Theseia and
datable by eponymous archons. But first it might be useful to say a few words about the

other inscriptions. IG ii2 959, inscribed by the cutter of the ephebic inscription IG ii2 1028 (100/99 BC), has now been joined to IG ii2 1014, dated to 109/8 by the archon Jason. This makes 959 the latest dated Theseia inscription.22 The others have also been closely examined by Stephen Tracy and to his skill at identifying letter-cutters' distinctive "hands" I owe the following observations: 960, 961 and 962 were inscribed by the so-called Agora I 6006 Cutter whose floruit Tracy now dates to 169/8-135/4 BC.23 This fits the suggested approximate dates in the Corpus; i.e., c.142-140, though plainly leaning towards the end of his professional activity.24 Tracy cannot attribute a known cutter to 964, but on the basis of
to the Study of Greek Associations Forbes, Neoi. A Contribution (Middleton, Conn.: 1933) p.2 divided the three age-classes of the Panathenaia (and at Nemea and Isthmia) into (hereafter Forbes, Neoi), = 12-16, = 16-20 and andres = 20 and up. paides ageneioi 20
of

19CA.

Interestingly, IG ii2 957 n, 65-74 would

competitions of the same event and

seem to indicate that in that year the phylarchs enjoyed

one phylarch was victorious twice. The cavalry

two sets
program

that no

seems to be the one subject to the greatest variation from Theseia 21

to Theseia.

Occurring only once in the Theseia documents: 956II, 78-79; also found in the contemporary Panathenaia: 2317,6 (restored). 23161,28-29; 22 New text to appear in a forthcoming book by Stephen Tracy on the Athenian letter-cutters from 229 to 86 BC. A.S. Henry, The Prescripts of Athenian Decrees {Mnemosyne Supplement 49; Leiden: 1977) pp.92-93, provides a brief note on the unusual nature of the prescript for IG ii2 1014. represents a change from his earlier suggestion in 'Five Letter-Cutters of Hellenistic BC)\ Hesperia 47 (1978) pp.261-266, where he dated him 148/7-135/4. See Appendix for additional comments. 23 This Athens (230-130

The Theseia inLate Hellenistic Athens

25

its letter forms he would put it after 120 BC25 Finally, as I noted earlier, 963 and 965 are
now apparently let me lost. state some basic premises. We know from the documents themselves that

Now,

the archons for IG ii2 956, 957 and 958 are Alist?las,

Anthesterios

and Phaidrias,

respectively. Also there is common agreement that the dates for Alist?las and Anthesterios are 161/0 and 157/6. I also accept the argument proposed by P?l?kidis, particularly from the reference in the Theseia inscriptions to the penteteric festival of the Ptolemaia (956,34-35; 957, 19-20; 958, 31), that our documents record not an annual Theseia but a new lavish penteteric festival which we should properly call theGreater Theseia.26 I am also convinced that this new penteteric festival was established to commemorate the return of Athens' old colonial possessions, Lemnos, Imbros, Delos and especially Skyros by the Romans at the conclusion of the Third Macedonian War in 167 BC.27What better time to honor Theseus with something special? Because there is no hint of the establishment of a new festival in IG ii2 956,1 would imagine that itmarks the second occurrence of theGreater Theseia; that is to say, the first probably took place in the archonship of Pelops in 165/4. There could have been too little time to organize the new festival for the Fall of 166 BC
So far, so good. However harmony ends on the date of the archonship of Phaidrias. IG

ii2 958 records a Greater Theseia, but which one: the festival we would expect in 153 BC, as P?l?kidis argued,28 or the following one, in 149 BC, asMeritt proposed exactly twenty-five years ago?29 In his Hesperia article,Meritt observed that the answer to this question might

251 am particularly grateful to Professor Tracy for supplying the results of his latest research tome. 26 See P?l?kidis, ?ph?bie pp.229-230, and in detail pp.295-300; he himself borrowed a suggestion of W.B. Dinsmoor, The Archons of Athens in theHellenistic 1931) p.262 n.2. This Age (Cambridge, Mass.: argument has gained the support of B.D. Meritt, 'Greek Inscriptions', Hesperia 33 (1964) pp.205-206, O. Reinmuth, Gnomon 38 (1966) p.799, P. Bruneau, Recherches sur les cultes de D?los ? l'?poque hell?nistique et ? V?poque imp?riale (Paris: 1970) p.35 and most recently Ch. Habicht, 'The Eponymous Archons of Athens from 159/8 to 141/0 BC, Hesperia 57 (1988) p.240. Although Skyros and Imbros are not mentioned by Polybius (30.20), they are documented as Athenian Athens (London: 1911) pp.315-316 and F.W. Walbank, A later;W.S. Ferguson, Hellenistic possessions Historical Commentary on Polybius ii (Oxford: 1979) p.443, think it probable that despite Polybius' silence these islands were also granted toAthens at this time. 28 Accepted by Habicht, op.cit. pp.239-240. 27

29 Hesperia 33 (1964) pp.205-206 and 'Athenian Archons 347/6-48/7 BC, Historia 26 (1977) pp.183-184. He has recently received support from R.S. Fisher, 'A New Priest of Sarapis on D?los', ZPE 58 (1985) pp.117-118, who posits as priest of Sarapis a Lenaios Hermeios, therefore of the tribe Akamantis (VI), to 149/8, assuming the application of the tribal cycle from 166/5 BC; but see the objections by Habicht, op.cit. pp.240-241.

26

G.R.

Bugh

be found

in a closer

examination

of the participants

in the Theseia

and particularly

at the age

classes inwhich they competed. In this, he was quite right. There seems to be general agreement that between 160/59 and 140/39 a break occurred in the cycle of secretaries of the Athenian boule. Meritt dates the break to the single year of archonship of Epicrates in 146/5.30 When P?l?kidis suggested that IG ii2 958 and, correspondingly, the archonship of Phaidrias, belonged to 153/2, this displaced Speusippos from the year thatMeritt had assigned to him. The secretary of Speusippos came from the deme Phlya, thereby positioning Ptolemais, the fifth tribe in the official order, just two years after the securely dated archonship of Mnesitheos in 155/4 whose secretary belonged to the third tribe in the official order. This seemed to work out neatly, until P?l?kidis redated Phaidrias. Meritt turned to the victor-lists for assistance. Pandionis, Now,
epigraphical

in the notes to IG ii2 958 Kirchner

and lexicographical information,

determined,

on the basis of scattered

of the boys' 1st class, 2nd

that the age-classes

class and 3rd class were divided into 14-15, 16-17 and 18-19, respectively, and the men's 20 and older.31 This scheme seemed to fit Euarchides son of Andreas of the tribeAntiochis In the archonship of Anthesterios (157/6) he won the boys' wrestling in the 1st age-class (9571, 84-85). In the archonship of Phaidrias he won in two events, the torch race for ex-ephebes (Ik t?v cv v e^p v, 958 I, 63-64)32 and the boys' wrestling in the ratherwell. open competition (ek ponton, II, 42-43). It follows that if as an ex-ephebe Euarchides was 19 years old in the archonship of Phaidrias, then counting back, he would have been 15 in the archonship of Anthesterios
limits. divisions One must and not also conclude the men's.

in 157/6 and thus would comply with Kirchner's age-class

that the ephebes and ex-ephebes competed in the boys'

But Meritt correctly observed thatKirchner's scheme did not fit Habron son of Kallias of the tribeAigeis. In the archonship of Alist?las (161/0) Habron won the boys' pankration in the 2nd age-class (956 n, 71-72). But in the archonship of Anthesterios (157/6) he won the boys' boxing in the open division (ek ponton, 957 n, 35). Meritt reasoned that if he were under 20, that is still in the boys' competitions, in 157/6, then he could not be any older than
30 Sec Historia 31 26 (1977) p. 184.

Repeated by Kirchner in his notes to S/G3 667 andM. Launey, Recherches sur les arm?es hell?nistiques ii (Paris: 1950) p.820 (hereafter Launey). However, Dinsmoor, op.cit. pp.262 and 265, assumed an age-class scheme of 1st age-class = 12-13, 2nd age-class = 14-15 and 3rd age-class = 16, 17, 18 and 19. It could also be argued that the ageneioi of the Panathenaia were equivalent to thepaides, 3rd age-class of the Theseia. 32 On the status of ex-ephebes see Forbes, Neoi pp.59-62.

The Theseia inLate Hellenistic Athens

27

15 four years earlier, and thatwould place him not in the boys' 2nd-age class but in the 1st
age-class. Meritt could only conclude that Kirchner's scheme was incorrect, that the age

classes needed to be divided differently. He suggested that the Theseia of IG ii2 958 and the archonship of Phaidrias belonged to 149/8, the next opportunity after 153/2, in the penteteric cycle of theGreater Theseia. Meritt broadened the age-classes and reasoned in the following
way: "the -npwrr] i^Xtiua runs up to and includes age 13, the Scvrepa ^XnxCa runs

from 14 through 15, and the rpCrr] t^kCo, from 16 through 17, with the epheboi and the graduated epheboi in the top ages of 18 and 19. Euarchides, who was eleven years old in 157/6, was nineteen years old in 149/8 (from Anthesterios to Phaidrias); and Habron, who was not more
Anthesterios)".33

than 19 in 157/6, was not more

This means, of course,

than 15 in 161/0 (from Aristolas

be missing the victor-list for

to
the

that we must

Greater Theseia of 153/2, that of the archonship of Speusippos. I believe, however, thatMeritt's assignation of Phaidrias to 149/8 is incorrect. Also I
think that his argument falters on the very issue he brought to our attention: the age-classes

of Athenian competitors. His revised system certainly resolves the problem of Habron son of Kallias, but it creates other more troubling problems. For example, in his Hesperia article he dismisses in a footnote (p.205 n.93) the fact that in IG ii2 958 Euarchides son of Andreas won the boys' wrestling competition in the open division and also the torch race of the ex ephebes. Yet his system must limit the paides 3rd age-class to "16 through 17". Does it
make attested sense only for the Athenians once elsewhere to create an elaborate world,34 system of boys' age-class subdivisions, that in the Greek and then add a,paides open division

is onomastically related but has no direct connection with the official paides age-classes? Furthermore, what about those young men of 18 (and 19) who did not participate in the
ephebeia, recalling that ephebic service in the second century BC was voluntary and lasted

only one year.35 According

category, ex-ephebes competition. the ek ponton had division, the opportunity strikes me

to Meritt's

system they could have competed

age-classes as well in two age categories, their own

in only one
and and the open

yet all of the paides of competing

as the ephebes

This

as a bit unfair.

33 Meritt, Hesperia 34 Inschr.

33 (1964) p.206.

Didyma 179, of imperial date, also attracts our attention because it records a four-year old victor in I am indebted to boxing, but offers no clue as to the precise divisions of first, second and third age-classes. der Professor Habicht for this reference. For other age-class divisions see T. Klee, Zur Geschichte gymnischenAgone an griechischen Festen (Leipzig: 1918) pp.43-44. 35 See P?l?kidis, ?ph?bie pp.l55ff.

28

G.R.

Bugh

In any

event,

what

is demanded

of us

is to examine

individual

victors

to gauge

the

consequences of shifting Phaidrias to 149/8. Euarchides won the torch race of ex-ephebes
and the boys' wrestling ekpanton in 149, thus making him 19 years old, or at any rate less

than 20.

He had won

Anthesterios

the boys' wrestling, 1st age-class, back in the archonship of in 157/6. That would make him 11 years of age, or no more than 12, when he that allowed

13 year-olds to compete. A similar situation exists for Mnesitheos son ofMnesitheos of the tribeOineis. He won the boys' boxing event ekpanton in 149 (958 n, 52-53), making him under 20 years of age. He had won the boys' boxing, 1st age-class, back in 157 (957 n, 29-30). He must have been under 12 at the time. Now
when Messene we consider to have that won it was viewed as an extraordinary at Olympia achievement for Damiskos 12 (Paus. 6.2.10), of the stade-run in 368 BC at the age of

won the division

these youthful victories become even more worrisome. Twelve must mark the lowest limit of the paides division at the Olympic Games and we can assume by this reference in
Pausanias appears that most to have paides competitors and victors we were should older than this. The men's Panhellenic division with at age 18.36 Of course, remained see from not equate local

begun

games

local games open

and the Theseia as we can

predominantly the ek ponton

in nature.

It is true that it was few appeared to

to foreigners,

category,

but very

have competed, ifwe may judge from only four individuals recorded.37
Euarchides athletic contests, and Mnesitheos, even at the local then, level, seem a little young to be competing outright and winning disbelief.38 The but not enough to warrant

son of Eudoxos of the tribe Hippothontis is, however, another matter. Eudoxos won the hoplomachia with shield and spear in the 3rd age-class in 149 (958 n, 75 76), that is when he was 16 or 17 years of age. He had won the hoplomachia with thureos (and broadsword) in the archonship of Anthesterios in 157/6 (957 H, 49-50). IfMeritt is
correct, then we are faced with the fact that Eudoxos won this "armed combat" competition at

case of Eudoxos

36 See Paus. 6.14.2 on Nikasylos

37 See Mommsen, op.cit. p.295

of Rhodes; for discussion

n.3.

see Klee, op.cit. pp.46-48.

38H.I. Marrou, Histoire de l'?ducation dans l'antiquit? (Paris: 1965) pp.182-183, does note, however, that boys as young as 9 or 10 competed in games at Sparta, and others as young as 7 or 8 elsewhere. But not, as far as I can discover, in armed-combat sports, even at Sparta (not a typical polis, in any case), where a boy's in R.M. Dawkins (ed.), The Sanctuary of Artemis Orthia at wrestling victory is recorded: A.M. Woodward Sparta (London: 1929) pp.288-290 and 318 n.41. Even this evidence from Sparta is not without problems, as the puzzling presence in certain inscriptions of the term <r attests. An interesting reference can be wc^pos found in Lucian, where he observes that in Sparta one can see their epheboi learning the art of dance no less than that of hoplomachia. When they quit sparring and striking one another, they finish their agon?a with dancing (Salt. 10.11-12).

The Theseia inLate Hellenistic Athens

29

a time when he was no more than 9 years old! Moreover

if he were 16 rather than 17 in

149/8, then he would be 8 years old in 157/6! Not only is he not even close to the upper limits of his age-class; i.e., 13, where one would expect to find most athletic winners,39 but young, particularly in a contest that has such an obvious military flavor to it. Do we imagine a tall, strapping lad of 8 or 9 destroying the competition of boys four or five years his senior? Are these hoplomachia events simply "mock duels also Eudoxos is ridiculously
between lads of twelve, fifteen, and eighteen years of age, not youthful gladiators, but

scions of the noblest Athenian families", as Ferguson believed?40 I think not. Comparative evidence from both Athens and elsewhere would suggest

that the

hoplomachia41 and thureamachia42 were usually reserved for older boys. In Athens the references to armed training occur most frequently with the institution of the ephebeia attested in the Classical period (AP 42.3: diTXoiuaxe?v) and in the inscriptions of Hellenistic Athens.43 This institution translated toAthens' possessions as well. In the 140s, a decree of the Athenian cleruchs on Delos honors Apollonios of Laodicea who for many years supervised the ephebes and neaniskoi kv to?s oitXois (ID?los 1501, 9-11). Outside Athens, we find some revealing information from Sestos, Teos, Pergamon, Priene, Erythrai, Babylon and Samos. It should be carefully noted from the outset,

39

Klee,

op.cit.

pp.47-48.

40Hellenistic

Athens p.295.

Wheeler; p. 182.

41 On this term see J. and the recent work by E.L. Juthner, 'Hoplomachie', RE viii (1913) cols.2298-2299, and Greek Dances in Arms', GRBS 23 (1982) pp.223-233 and Kyle, Athletics e.g., 'Hoplomachia 42 On the thureamachia I am indebted toN. V. Sekunda for the following information. Fighting with thureos and machaira appears to be Celtic in origin (see Polyb. 3.114.3; 2.30.8) and it is likely that this style of combat was introduced into Greek warfare in the Hellenistic period (see Plut. Philopoemen 9.1-7; Paus. 8.50.1) as a consequence of the invasions of the Galatians beginning in 279 BC. By the second century BC the thureamachia had apparently made it into the training program of various Greek cities; e.g., Athens and

Samos. hoplomachia

Sekunda

writes:

"Thus

contrasted

in inscriptions when, are to thureomachia, we

concerning to understand

military-style the contrast

combat as being

we see competitions, between Greek-style

For a possible fighting with shield and spear and Celtic-style fighting with thureos and machaira". representation of the thureamachia as a combat sport see P. Bienkowski, Les Celtes dans les arts mineurs gr?co-romains (Krakow: 1928) pp.127 and 129 fig. 179, a terracotta from Myrina which depicts two youths ("juv?niles") equipped with oval shields and swords engaged in duelistic combat. For a general discussion of theGalatians, their equipment and style of fighting, see Launey i pp.490-534. 43 See 2 (1933) pp. 158-160 no.6, 1 (c.232/1 BC) with e.g. IG ii2 766, 10 and 40 (243/2 BC); Hesperia additional notes inHesperia 11 (1942) pp.299-302; IG ii2 900, 21 hoplomachon (restored); 1006, 44-45; 15 (1946) p.193 no.38, 15;Hesperia 30 (1961) p.12 1008, 38-39; 1009, 21; 1011, 28; 1028, 52; Hesperia no.8,9 (partially restored, but secure); for general discussion see P?l?kidis, ?ph?bie pp.267-273.

30

G.R.

Bugh

however,

that age-groups

differed

from

city

to city;

for instance,

that of ephebos.

In some

places ephebic status came with the boy's rite of passage to puberty; i.e., in the 15th year of
age, not at age 18, as was the case would in Athens. Thus, Athens' 1st and 2nd age-classes, to Kirchner's Sestos comes Menas be considered late second is praised patron gods in other cities.44 in which the twice of the

according From

scheme,

epheboi century

the well-known son of Men?s,

BC inscription

gymnasiarch, festival

for his munificent of the gymnasium.45

administration Menas

of Hermes

and Herakles,

exhibited

decorated hopla (shields?) inscribedwith the names of the victorious ephebes; provided athla for thepaides and instituted special monetary prizes (themata; cf. SIG^ 1063) for the ephebes and themen in the contests of the hoplomachia,
also provided hopla as prizes in the makros

archery and the javelin (lines 79-82). He

eutaxia, philoponia and euexio, that is,

dromos,

the long run, good order, industrious training and good conditioning. With
last three events, Krauss comments "Neben den sportlichen Agonen

respect to the
Menas in

veranstaltet

seinen beiden Amtszeiten

ist".46 Earlier

als Gymnasiarch Agone, deren Hauptzweck milit?rischer Natur

is praised for having taken care of the eutaxia of the ephebes

in the text, Menas

and neoi (line 31).

euexia seem

If we may draw from Pergamene evidence, eutaxia, philoponia

the matriculation At men of ? pais Sestos, it would men, to an ephebe: 'eyKpiaig

and

to signal K tcSv ephebes, training

el g tov? contests of good were order,

<}>T?povc reserved industrious for the paides for

TTcuS?jv.47 young and good

appear, military-style while the contests of passage,

and mature

conditioning

offered

a sort of rite

a preparation,

to the ephebate.

44 For general discussion see M. Nilsson, Die hellenistische Schule (Munich: 1955) pp.34-42 (hereafter Nilsson, Schule); for the ephebate of Pergamon, for example, see E.V. Hansen, The Attalids of Pergamon2 (Ithaca: 1971) pp.392-393. 45 OGIS
no. 1 pp.

339; see now J. Krauss, Die Inschriften von Sestos und der thrakischen Chersones
14-63 for text, translation and commentary.

(Bonn:

1980)

46 For other epigraphical examples of eutaxia, philoponia and euexia in the Greek world see Krauss, ibid. For example, at Tralles, euexia 5/G3 1060,4 {andres) and 1062, 5 (neoi); see now F.B. Poljakov, pp.59-60. Die Inschriften von frail?is undNysa i (Bonn: 1989) nos. 106 and 107 for text and commentary. 47 See P. = IGR 4 no.482; Jacobstahl, 'Die Arbeiten zu Pergamon 1906-1907\ AM 33 (1908) pp.387-388 E. Ziebarth, Aus dem griechischen Schulwesen (Leipzig & Berlin: 1914) pp. 142-143 and Poljakov, op.cit. p.60. An inscription from Erythrai lists the three events (restored, but secure) immediately above the heading
for ephebes; although the age-class heading for the three is not preserved, a good argument for paidon can be

made: see H. Engelmann and R. Merkelbach, no.81 pp. 176-178 for text and commentary.

Die Inschriften von Erythrai und Klazomenai

i (Bonn: 1972)

The Theseia inLate Hellenistic Athens

31

This does not mean thatpaides were prohibited from participating in archery and javelin
competitions elsewhere; see e.g. the third century BC inscription from Koressos on Keos

(S7G3 958, 33-34), inwhich itmay be relevant to note thatwhereas themen-victors received
appropriate weapons; e.g., quiver, bow, spears, helmet, as prizes, the pais-viclors in the

bow and the javelin were awarded only a portion of meat (lines 27-34), and a second century BC inscription from Teos, recording the foundation of a school by Polythrous son of
Onesimos.48 From the latter we learn that the paidonomos and gymnasiarch are to hire a

hoplomachos and an instructor of archery and the javelin and that these men are to teach the
ephebes and "tous paidas who have been registered to learn music" (lines 22-25). Unless

there is an implied division of labor; i.e., hoplomachos

instructor for paides, it would appear that the paides were

for ephebes and archery/javelin

to receive hoplite training as well

(cf./Gxii9,no.234,5-ll).

But how old are these boys?

schoolteachers drachma are to be hired, salary, one

In lines 8-13 of the text it is reported that three

to teach to teach the first class the second (to iTpaJ-rov ep y o v) at a 600 and the third

per year

the second

class

at 550 drachmas,

the third class at 500 drachmas. In this system the first class should logically consist of the
older, more advanced, boys and girls because the teacher receives a higher salary. The text

continues by detailing that a lute-player is to be appointed at 700 drachmas a year. His responsibility will be to teach music and the lute to thepaides "whom it is appropriate to
select (tovs for the higher tovtcov class (els tovttiov) v WT and those who is also are a year expected younger than them to the

evtavTcSt

pov?)";49he

to teach music

ephebes. The paidonomos will determine the age of these paides (tie pi Se tt^s t^XikCcic tcSv iTaCSu)v TovTwv, lines 19-20). One can conclude, then, that the boys who had been
registered to learn music and thus were older eligible nearer for instruction by the hoplomachos with whom that no boy and the they are too young instructor were the age of the ephebes would ensure

archery/javelin associated was admitted From

boys,

in the school

regulations.

The paidonomos

to this type of training. we possess a number of inscriptions which link armed-combat contests

Pergamon

with ephebes, young men and men.

In one (OGIS 764), a gymnasiarch

is honored for

48 SIG3 578. For discussion see L. Robert, ?tudes anatoliennes (Paris: 1937) p.402 (hereafter Robert, ?tudes) and Launey ii pp.821-822. For translation seeM.M. Austin, The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman Conquest: A Selection of Ancient Sources in Translation (Cambridge: 1981) no. 120 (hereafter
Austin, Documents).

49

Austin, Documents

p.211.

32

G.R.

Bugh

taking care of the diodrome

(running

events)

and t o vs

Si?

t<Sv

ottXwv

?y^vas

forthe

ephebes and neoi (lines 24 and 29). Other inscriptions refer to the hopla for ephebes and neoi, and hoplon agones for ephebes and men.50 There is no sign that the paides were eligible for these weapons events. From Priene comes an inscription, dating to about 80 BC, which details the honors for a certain Zosimos (IPriene 112). Not only did he provide the playing balls (sphairas) and hopla for the use of the ephebes (line 73), but also he established a new event for the ephebes called the kallioplia (lines 109-110), "probablement concours d'entretien des armes" (Launey ii p.822). The usual division between ephebes and neoi under the supervision of the gymnasiarch on the one hand and the boys under the supervision of thepaidonomos on the other hand ismaintained in the procession to accompany Zosimos to the agora for his coronation (IPriene 113,114-116). In an agonistic list (c.100 BC or later) from the gymnasium of Erythrai, the contests for the ephebes include the bow, the javelin and the hoplomachia (line 11), the last won by [Am]monios son of Agathon.51 These events are closely paralleled in inscriptions from
Babylon categories, and from ephebes Samos. An inscription For from Babylon the contests clearly include records two age-class the javelin, and neoi.52 the ephebes, the bow,

the hoplomachia

(?ttoXox,

koCXcov, line 12), the thureamachia (ovpccSt,

line 13), the

dolichos and the stade-run. This list of ephebic competitions is immediately followed by contests for neoi (the heading reads tcSv Se veo>v, line 16). Although the tablet breaks off at the line recording the javelin event, Haussoullier (pp.360-361) is safe to suggest that the rest of the list of events for the neoi duplicated that of the ephebes. There cannot have been a
tcSv Se ttciCScdv age-class category since the heading t<Sv Se e<j>Ti?[?>v] immediately

follows the prescript and, programmatically, a boy-victors' listwould not have followed the
neoi who must From be older than the ephebes. at Samos come similar agonistic lists. A third-century BC the gymnasium

inscription (Michel 899) records month by month the following events: catapault, javelin,
bow, hoplomachia, thureamachia, dolichos and the stade-run. The age-class heading is

lacking, but a strong case could be made for it having been neon on the basis of another
50 Hansen, op.cit. p.394, argues that these military-style andMerkelbach, contests ought to imply amilitary purpose.

51 See Engelmann

op.cit. no.81 pp. 176-178. and the discussion by

52 See B. de Babylone', Klio 9 (1909) pp.352-363 Haussoullier, 'Inscriptionsgrecques Forbes, Neoi pp.46 and 51, Robert, Etudes p.402 and Nilsson, Schule p.44.

The Theseia inLate Hellenistic Athens

33

Samian inscription which nearly duplicates these events and clearly identifies the victors as neoi.53 A related inscription (5/G3 1061), dated to the second century BC, adds the following events to those recorded inMichel 899: diaulos, euexia, eutaxia, philoponia and lithobolos (engine for hurling stones), in that order (lines 15-19). Sostratos son of Sostratos won the hoplomachia and the stade-run (lines 11 and 14); Apollas son of Apollonius, the thureamachia and philoponia
the heading ?bergang iraXX^Kwv, zum Ephebenalter

(lines 12 and 19). Interestingly, this list of victors falls under

by Nilsson as mellephebov, i.e., "diejenigen, die auf dem

defined

stehen".54

In addition, this inscription preserves a partial victor-list immediately above ?itpallekon heading; this list, unfortunately, does not retain its heading, but it does duplicate the final six v v contests of thepallekes. The lost heading could have been e $ i\ ? u> or v e u> ,55or possibly even ttcl?Swv.
would

If the last, then the nature of these final events, notably the lithobolos,
advanced boys, not much younger than 15.

argue for more

On this point, compare the inscription from Beroia in Macedonia, dated between 167 and 148 BC, wherein it is decreed that the gymnasiarch shall "offer as prizes a weapon (hoplon) and three others for fitness (euexia), good discipline (eutaxia), and hard training (philoponia) for those up to the age of 30... As for (the contests of) good discipline and hard training, the gymnasiarchs shall swear by Hermes and judge for good discipline who seems to him to be most well behaved of those up to the age of 30, and for hard training who seems to him to have trained hardest during the year of those up to the age of 30" (Side B, 46-57).56 Launey considered these contests strongly military in tone, describing the gymnasium at Samos as an "?cole militaire plus que d'?tablissement d'athl?tisme" (ii p.817). To return to the point. The victory of Eudoxos
shield and broadsword, 1st age-class, does not

in 157 BC in armed combat with oval

appropriate for a competitor 8 or 9

seem

years young. But we still have not addressed the issue of Habron son of Kallias and the fact that he does not fit Kirchner's age-class divisions. The answer, I think, is disarmingly

53 See E. Preuner, 'Siegerlisten von Samos', AM 28 (1903) pp.357-358 (corrected by Robert, ?tudes p.402 n.3); in this article, Preuner also published a new victor-list from Samos which included the hoplomachia and thureamachia with two victors in each event (p.354, lines 7-12). 5* Schule ip.37. ii p.833.

55 See Launey

56 For text and brief commentary see J.M.R. Cormack, *The Gymnasiarchal Law of Beroea', Ancient ii (Thessaloniki: 1977) pp.139-150 and J. & L. Robert, REG 91 (1978) pp.431-435 no.274; for Macedonia translation see Austin, Documents no. 118 p.205.

34

G.R.

Bugh

simple:

Habron

was and won

younger

than 16 years

old,

the minimum tt\?

age for the 2nd age-class, Sev-repas the Theseia t^kCcl?

but (956

he competed II, 71-72).

in the 2nd age-class, words, he "jumped"

thepankration an age-class.

In other

Within

documents

themselves we have two examples of this phenomenon (noted by P?l?kidis, ?ph?bie p.233), although they do differ slightly from Habron. First, Demetrios son of Antimenes of the tribe Kekropis won the torch race for ephebes in Theseia of 157 (957 1,49-50) and also won the men's diaulos in that same festival (957 I, 83). Secondly, Theophrastos son of Herakleitos of the tribe Oineis won the spear-throwing event for ephebes in the archonship of Phaidrias (958 n, 77-78) as well as themens' diaulos in the same Theseia (9581, 93-94).
Outside boy, won divisions Kallistratos classes placed Athens, we can cite the case of Artemidoros at Smyrna of Tralles who, technically AD still a at the Ionian the boys, won in the first century (Paus. in all three and that of age

the pankration in a single of Sikyon day,

games

the ageneioi the boxing

and the men competition

6.14.2-3),

who

in the ageneioi BC.57 There were This

and men's

in the same on athletes

Isthmian competing sports. when

games above There

in the third century their age group, were safeguards only

no restrictions is only fair, as in his of

the reverse.58

is the case own

in modern

against

a young man

competing

age-class

or above,

his physique

did not appear

adequate;

for example,

Pherias

Aigina, who was barred by the judges from competing at Olympia in 468 BC in boys' wrestling (Paus. 6.14.1).59 The judges at Olympia seemed to have concerned themselves as much with physical equity as with ages, if the story Xenophon reports is true: the Spartan king Agesilaos, in love with the son of the Athenian Eualkes, used his influence on the
judges ttcuSwv to admit (Hell. the boy 4.1.40; to the stade cf. Plut. Ages. con?petition, 13). even though he was tuey^cn-o? too v

This finally brings us back to Habron. Problems remain. If he were really say 15, then we would expect to find that he had won not only the 2nd age-class pankration in 161 BC, but also logically the 1st age-class pankration. But in fact thatwas won by a Phileas son of
57 On Artemidoros see Ch. Habicht, Pausanias1 Guide to Ancient Greece (Berkeley: 1985) pp.82-83; Kallistratos see L. Moretti, Iscrizioni agonistiche greche (Rome: 1953) no.40 pp. 103-108. 58 This on

prohibition should also apply to ephebes who might have been older than 18 in their ephebic year; in the case of a father holding back one of his sons in order to have both participating in the ephebeia in e.g.,
the same year: see J. von Freeden, 'rUo-roKpciTYis koI 'AtroXXoSupos Za-rvpov AvpCScu (IG ii2 2949)\

See also S. Dow, 'The Athenian Epheboi; Other Staffs, and the Staff of the ZPE 61 (1985) pp.215-218. TAPA 91 (1960) pp.381-409, especially 391-392. This is not the same situation as with the Diogeneion', neaniskoi, traditionally amuch less precise term than epheboi, at least inAthens; see Appendix. 59 See comments by Klee, op.cit. pp.47-48.

The Theseia inLate Hellenistic Athens

35

Phileas of the tribeAkamantis (956 n, 69-70). Several possible explanations come tomind:
certain classes, events took place could at the same only enter time,60 one or with respect to the the judges 1st, 2nd decided and 3rd age that Habron a competitor or perhaps

level,

was physically
bumped him up.

too developed
This would

to compete fairly in his own age-class and consequently

Habron's victory all the sweeter and have brought

have made

special honor to both himself and his family. We note also that Habron's events, the pankration, a nasty combination of boxing and wrestling, and its cousin, boxing, in which he defeated all comers in 157 BC, requires significant strength and body mass, physical
features easy enough to evaluate. We should not forget that modern boxing and wrestling

are divided by weight, not age. In conclusion, I am persuaded that the archon Phaidrias rightly belongs to 153/2, not
149/8. Habron. business Put in its simplest terms, Eudoxos either aspis is much and doru of age, more or with of a problem thureos to explain away is not than the be with under and machaira

Hoplomachia of young men

ten years

let alone

as victors

at that age, and cannot

dismissed as "mock duels" without any connection tomilitary training. IG ii2 956,957
958, uncovered together, represent the three consecutive penteteric Theseia of the years

and
161,

157 and 153 BC. Glenn

Virginia

Richard
Polytechnic

Bugh
Institute and State University/ Study, Princeton

The Institute for Advanced

60

An

idea

suggested

by Mommsen,

op.cit.

p.295,

to accommodate

the many

events,

and

presumably

preliminary bouts, into the single day of 8 Pyanopsion. But it now appears that the athletic program took place several days before the eighth: in joining IG ii2 1014, Tracy has revealed that the agonothete of the Theseia of 109 BC was honored by public decree on 6 Pyanopsion, leading him to suggest that "the elaborate
games honoring Theseus, no doubt of several days duration, came during the week before the great sacrifice".

We do know thatAristos son of Archiades of Aiantis won both the boys' boxing, 3rd age-class, and the boys' pankration, 3rd age-class, in the same Theseia (960 n, 11-12 and 21-22); Kairios son of Telon won the boys' stade-run ekpanton and the boys' diaulos ek ponton in 161 BC (956 I, 82-83; II, 48-49); Epikrates son of Arkesas of the tribeOineis won two "armed combat" events, the hoplomachia with shield and spear, 3rd age son of class, and then with thureos, 3rd age-class, in the Theseia of 157 BC (957 II, 54-57); Meleton Strombylion of the tribe Aigeis won three events in the boys' 2nd age-class, the stade, diaulos and wrestling, in 161 BC (9561,78-79; II, 44-45 and 53-54); and Xenon son of Iason of the tribe Aigeis or Oineis who won two events in the boys' 1st age-class, the stade and the diaulos, in the Theseia of IG ii2 961 (I, 42-43 and 52 53).

36

G.R.

Bugh

APPENDIX

Another divisions.

line of argument may be employed to cast doubt on Kirchner's age-class In the Theseia of 161 BC, Kairios son of Telon was the leader of the neaniskoi of

the Lyceum who were victorious in the torch race (9561, 67-69) and he also won two boys' open contests in the same festival, the stade run and the diaulos (I, 82-83 and n, 48-49). Similarly, in the Theseia of IG ii2 958 Silenos son of Lykos won the boys' diaulos ek panton (I, 91-93); he should be the same [Sileno]s61 son of Lykos of the tribeHippothontis who won the torch race of the neaniskoi of the Lyceum (I, 65-66). This should mean that the neaniskoi were younger than 20 for Kairios and Silenos to have competed in the boys' division. Now, if we look at IG ii2 960 and 961, dated to the 140s, we find an Aristos son of Archiades of the tribeAiantis who won the boys' boxing andpankration, 3rd age-class, in 960 (n, 12 and 21-22) and the torch race of the neaniskoi of the Lyceum in 961 (I, 31-33). If 960 and 961 record penteteric Greater Theseia, then Kirchner's age-classes cannot work,
assuming the neaniskoi are under 20 years of age, because Aristos would have to be no older

than 15 in the Theseia of 960 to be under 20 in the Theseia of 961, yet we know that he belonged to the 3rd age-class, that is 18-19, in 960. Obviously something is wrong with
one or the other of our assumptions. Also even Meritt's scheme would have to be rejected

because his 3rd age-class is limited "16 through 17". The simplest andmost likely explanation, aside from discarding the penteteric idea, is that the term neaniskoi is not limited to young men under 20 years of age. There is some
agreement that it commonly and is hard means youths past If we ephebic examine age, but as Forbes the Theseia has stated we "this term is slippery to define".62 observe

documents,

that in 956, 957, 960 and 961 the sequence of participants is (1) paides, (2) ephebes and (3)

61 Restored b2Neoi

by P?l?kidis, ?ph?bie p.233 n.3.

p.61 (cf. p.2), but I cannot accept his conclusion that the neaniskoi of the Lyceum in the Theseia inscriptions were ephebes on the basis of an inscription from the 2nd-3rd centuries AD (IG ii2 3758). Austin, Documents no. 118 p.207, also seems to follow this line when he suggests that the neaniskoi referred to in the gymnasiarchy law of Beroia (Side B line 14) are **probablyephebes". But this strikes me as too restrictive - in the preceding passage (lines 10-11) regulations are set forth concerning practice in the javelin and bow
for the ephebes and "those about the age of 22" (o? vue t? Svo kc? cCkoo-i-v ctti). For what reason should the

prohibition against the neaniskoi talking or mingling with the paides (lines 14-15) not also apply to the second group as well? Cormack, op.cit. p. 148, thought that the neaniskoi were to be identified with the neoi mentioned in lines 80, 88 and 95. In any case, it still remains unclear what exactly "those about the age of 22" meant - Nilsson, Schule p.38, conjectures "vielleicht sind die zweiundzwanzig Jahre eine Altersgrenze f?r die neoi, mit denen die Epheben Milit?r?bungen vornahmen".

The Theseia inLate Hellenistic Athens

37

In 958, the ex-ephebes replace the ephebes (I, 63) and in 957, curiously, the neaniskoi have been replaced by themen (andres) of the Lyceum (1,51). In these torch races the neaniskoi always belong to the Lyceum and so do the andres who are recorded only neaniskoi.
once.63

I suggest that in such gymnasia the ages of themembers were more fluid, extending from
the late teens into the early gymnasia twenties, than in the age-classes, e.g., of Timeas and that in competition precision in the various and palaistrai9, and Antigenes,

involving

age-classes was less important than club identity. This ambiguity might explain the reference to the "men of theLyceum" in the slot regularly occupied by the neaniskoi. If this is correct, then Kairios and Silenos could well have been under 20 years of age in the Theseia of 161 BC and Aristos could have been in his early 20s in theTheseia of IG ii2 961, thus preserving
Kirchner's age-classes and the penteteric nature of the festival. 960 and 961 Furthermore, represent it would more allow us to conclude penteteric that the span of time between cannot than one

cycle.64

63 On the Lyceum 64 I wish

see P?l?kidis, ?ph?bie pp.260-261.

to express my appreciation to Emeritus Professor H.B. Mattingly, respondent to this paper at the University of New England epigraphy seminar held in July 1989, for his very helpful and thoughtful comments, toDr. IanWorthington, convenor of the seminar, and Professor Greg Stanton, for their gracious Thanks go also to the various Seminar participants who generously offered suggestions hospitality. The final version has incorporated some of these and has added further documentation where informally. appropriate, while preserving the general scope and thesis of the original paper. I am also indebted to Professor Christian Habicht of the Institute for Advanced Study, Princeton, who kindly consented to critique a draft of this paper: his comments have spared me a number of careless mistakes. Flaws yet remaining are, of
course, my own.