'Οπλομάχος (Hoplomachos)
(‘Hoplomachos’)

177

Discussion Meineke 18391.372; 1840 III. 179; 1847. 582; Bothe 1855. 425; Kock
1884 11.149; Edmonds 1959 11.60—1; Kassel-Austin 1991 11.256; Sanchis Llopis
et al. 2007. 257
Title Cf. Alexis Stratidtes. Meineke (1839 1.372) states that ‘titulus incertum
est utrum de campidoctore vel armorum magistro an de ephebo qui artem
arma tractandi disceret, intelligendus sit.’ Although precise identification of
the play’s eponym is debatable, Meineke’s alternatives are incorrect, since
the word ought not to refer to an ephebe who learns how to handle arms
but to the man who teaches the ephebe. Pl. La. 183b; Euthd. 271d-2a; X. Lac.
11.8; Thphr. Char. 5.10 all refer to hoplomachoi as travelling instructors (see
Diggle 2004 on Thphr. Char. 5.10 [with bibliography]); since there are no
references from this period that suggest otherwise,70 such a person is almost
certainly meant here. By the third century, the term seems to have become
institutionalized, at least in Athens, as the designation for an instructor of
ephebes; cf. Teles p. 50 έφηβος γέγονεν· εμπαλιν τον κοσμητήν φοβείται,
τον παιδοτρίβην, τον οπλομάχον, τον γυμνασίαρχον, ύπό πάντων τούτων
μαστιγοϋται, παρατηρεϊται, τραχηλίζεται; Syll? 697Ε.11 (128/7 BC; from
Delphi but referring to Athenian ephebes); SEGXXVI 176.60 (AD 170/1-175/6;
from Athens); Pelekidis 1962. 108.71
Interpretation A reasonable hypothesis is that the hoplomachos of the play
is a version of the well-known character-type of the braggart soldier (note
the mocking treatment in Pl. La.·, cf. the account in X. Lac.)·, for the type, see
Hofmann-Wartenberg 1973; Neumann 1958.137-42; Arnott 1996 introduction
to Alex. Stratidtes.
Date Unknown.

70 Ephor. FGrHist 70 F 54 reports that fighting with heavy arms originated in Mantinea
and that a certain Demeas was the first instructor. Demeas was presumably a
Mantinean and not a travelling instructor, but his position has little if any bearing
on the situation in Athens.
71 At P.Cair.Zen. Ill 59298 (250 BC), a certain Paramonos, the recipient of the letter, is
designated as hoplomachos. He obviously has no connection with Athenian ephe-
bes, but in a second letter, P.Cair.Zen. Ill 59488, Paramonos requests the purchase
of twelve strigils, which perhaps implies the existence of a permanent or semi-
permanent establishment in Philadelphia.