Draft-Dodging Ephebes:
The Avoidance of Military
Service in the Ephebeia

John L. Friend (University of Texa, Austin)

The ephebeia as described in the Aristotelian Athenaion Politeia (42) was an institution unparalleled in Athenian history, in that all eighteen and nineteen year old Athenian male citizens were obligated to devote two years of their lives to military training in the art of war and to patrolling the chora of Attica (cf. Lyc.Leocr. 76). An examination of the epigraphic evidence for the institution in the Lycurgan Period (334/2-323/2 B.C.) suggests that the number of citizens enrolled in the ephebeia increased over time. This is most clearly demonstrated from three inscriptions of the tribe Cecropis which have largely complete ephebic rosters: ca. 42 for 334/3 B.C. (IG II² 1156), 52 for 333/2 B.C. (Clinton 1988), and ca. 65 for 332/1? B.C. (Traill 1986). The rosters from other tribal inscriptions do not contradict the above inscriptions: e.g. two rosters of Leontis attest an increase from c. 44 ephebes in 330/29 B.C. to 62 ephebes in 324/3 B.C. (Reinmuth 1971, nos. 8 and 15). The evidence taken together implies an annual enrollment of 450-500 ephebes in the first two years of the institution, which then increased to 600 or more in subsequent years.

I argue in this paper that the lower enrollment figure for 334/3-333/2 B.C. reflects a reluctance on the part of some Athenian youths to serve in the ephebeia, despite the willingness of the polis to provide them with trophe for the length of their military service and to equip them with state-funded armor ([Arist].Ath.Pol. 42.3-4). Matthew Christ, in his recent book The Bad Citizen in Classical Athens (Cambridge 2006), has drawn attention to the fact that an unknown but significant number of Athenian citizens was unwilling to serve on overseas campaigns and, having been conscripted for service, would attempt to dodge the draft by various means. In similar fashion, when the Athenians created the ephebeia ca. 335/4, some ephebes had no desire to put their lives on hold in order to perform two years of garrison duty and consequently actively sought to avoid their obligations. Indeed, the stringent conditions imposed upon the ephebes to make sure that they had no excuse for absence probably reflects this lack of enthusiasm for the ephebeia ([Arist].Ath.Pol. 42.5).

The Athenians managed to solve this problem and hence were able to increase the yearly enrollment in the ephebeia through a variety of methods. First, they ensured that ephebes were not illegally claiming that they had a physical disability or illness which rendered them (seemingly) incapable of undertaking their military service. Second, the ephebes would have faced considerable social pressure from their fathers and their communities not to shirk from their duties. Third, if shame was effective in getting ephebes to comply with the obligations demanded of them, so too was appealing to their sense of philotimia, “their love of honor.” Indeed, the multiple crowning ceremonies at the end of their service and the repeated opportunities to display their manliness before the demos during their stint in the ephebeia must have been a highpoint in the life for many otherwise undistinguished Athenians.