We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2013
The first fragments of the Epicurean inscription of Diogenes of Oenoanda were discovered by M. Holleaux and P. Paris one hundred years ago, in December 1884, and it is particularly satisfying to be able to mark the centenary of this significant event by publishing three new fragments of Diogenes' work.
The fragments were discovered by members of a British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara team, which spent two weeks at Oenoanda in the summer of 1983 (17th–31st August) carrying forward the epigraphical and topographical survey of the site begun in 1974–7 and continued in 1981.
The members of the team were A. S. Hall (Director), J. J. Coulton, A. Farrington and R. R. R. Smith. The representative of the Turkish Government was Bay İbrahim Malkoç. A heavy debt of gratitude is owed, and warmly acknowledged, to the Directorate-General of Antiquities and Museums of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism in Ankara, from which the permit was derived.
2 On the work of Holleaux, Paris, and other members of l'École française d'Athènes, see Smith J.
3 See Smith, M. F., AS 23 (1973), 62Google Scholar, Smith K 846–7 and Plate 270 fig. 12, Smith N 79–80 and Pl. XIIIc. The text is being edited by M. Wörrle.
4 Bericht über zwei Reisen im südwestlichen Kleinasien, Denkschriften der Akademie der Wissenschaften in Wien, phil.-hist. Klasse, 45 (Wien, 1897), 55Google Scholar.
5 “Termessians at Oenoanda”, AS 32 (1982), 115–31Google Scholar. I am indebted to Coulton for the views expressed not only in his important article, but also in letters from both Oenoanda and Oxford in the summer of 1983.
6 Coulton, op. cit. 123, suggests that the Kemerarası site was developed after Oenoanda's aqueduct suffered serious damage.
7 For photographs of the hill, see Smith K Pl. 265, figs. 1–2.
8 Wherever possible, measurements should be taken from the stone itself, not from the squeeze, since squeeze paper is apt to shrink.
9 This view is favoured by Sedley.
10 Smith F 11. For improvements to the text and interpretation of NF 19, see Sedley, D. N., CR N.S. 26 (1976), 218Google Scholar; Clay, D., AJP 97 (1976), 308–9Google Scholar; A. Laks and C. Millot in Bollack-Laks, 327–9; Barigazzi, A., Prometheus 3 (1977), 15–16Google Scholar.
11 It is worth noting, too, that Cicero (Div. 1.19.37), in his discussion of oracles, refers to the same response of the Delphic oracle mentioned by Diogenes in NF 19.
12 Thus Guthrie, , HGP III 286Google Scholar, quotes F. Heinimann as saying that “it must be taken as certain that the Sophist, the oligarchic orator and the tragedian are three different people”.
13 These fragments are listed in Smith M 78.
14 Smith F 48.
15 I still believe this, despite the arguments (to the contrary) of Hoffman 430–44.
16 See Smith M 79–81.
17 See Smith M 79–80.
18 See the diagram in Smith L 45 (fig. 1).
19 See e.g. SVF I.47.19–26Google Scholar, III.28.4–8, 29–31.
20 See e.g. Cic, . Fin. 3.50–1Google Scholar.
21 See e.g. Long, A. A., Hellenistic Philosophy (London, 1974), 76–8Google Scholar.
22 I quote the translation of Bailey, C., Epicurus (Oxford, 1926), 97Google Scholar.
