Monday, January 28, 2013

Fragment 48

Again we have a piece of the puzzle in very good condition with a wide expanse of nearly undamaged text. It is alternatively numbered Cousin 13 and Usener 24. It has no breaks but does however have some illegible patches. 



Column 1


οντος χειμώνα.
φεύγΊοντες ει: επινό-
ησιν οΐκ:ηαάτων ήλθαν,
δ t ôc Ί δε των περιβολών,
5          ας έποιοΰντο τοις σώα|_χ-
<7jiv. είτε φύλλοις αυτά.
σ]*ε'ποντες εϊτε [ίοτα-
vatç είτε και δοοαΐς, άναι-
ροΰντες ηδη τα π:ρό,βα-
10         τα, εις ένΟύαησιν ίη-
θητων, στρεπτών τ.εν
ούπω, κατωτών δ' ίσως
η όποιωνοΰν. είτα όε
προβαίνων ό χρόνος
Column 2
ταϊς έπινοϊαι; αυτών
η των α.ετ' αύτοΰς ενε'-
βαλεν και τόν ίστόν.
εις ούν ούδεαίαν τέχνην,
5          ώ; ο]ΰδέ ταύτα?, ουτ' άλ-
λι ον τινά θεών ούτε
την Αθηναν χαραλτ^υ.-
π|_τ:έον" ~άσας γαρ εγέν-
νησαν αί γοείαι κοα πε-
10         ο'.τντώσε'.ς αετα τοΰ
χρόνου, και τών
φθόνγων δε ένεκεν ( λε'-
γω οε των τε ονοαατων
Column 3
και τών ρηγάτων, ών
το τας πρώτας
γης φύντες ,_άνθρω:-οι )
^.ήτε τόν Έρρη^ν παρα-
5          λααβάνωρ,εν ε·ς δ'.-
δασκαΓλ^ίαν, ώς φασίν
τίνες ( περιφανή; γαρ
αύτ[η] γε άδολετ/ία )
{Λητε τών φιλοσόφων
10         πιστεύωαΓειν τοϊς λέ-
γουσι κατά θε'σιν και
διδαχην ε~ ιτεΟηναι
τα ονόματα τοϊς -ράγ^;Λα·
σιν, ϊνα αυτών έ'χωσί_ι τηυ-
Column 4
α της προς [άλ;λι_ή]λους ένε
κα ραδίας άποδηλώσεως οι
άνθρωποι" γελοϊον γάρ
έστι, α,αλλον δε παν-
5          τος [γ]ελοίου γελοιότε-
ρον, προς τώ και το ά-
όύνα[τ_:ο[ν] αύτώ προσεΐ-
ναι, σ[υνα]γαγείν αε'ν
τίνα τα [το]σάδε πλήθη,
10         ένα τυν^άΐνοντα' ουδέ
γχρ πω [τότε] β[ασι]λ[έ]ες η-
σαν ούόέ αήν γ1 ρ]άααα-
τα, οπού γε t/,ηόε οί φθόν ·
γοι ( περί γάρ τούτων και

The source here is Ernst Kalinka and Rudolf Heberdey, L'inscription philosophique d'Oenoanda in the Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Volume 21, 1897. pp. 390.

Sunday, January 27, 2013

A Note on Kalinka and Heberdey



As we start to delve into the inscription the easiest point of departure is Ernst Kalinka and Rudolf Heberdey, L'inscription philosophique d'Oenoanda in the Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Volume 21, 1897.

This provides images of the previously documented pieces that they were able to rediscover on their trip to the site. It also provides some conjectural reconstruction of missing parts but in a very limited way. The attraction of starting with their text though is that they had, in a sense, the low hanging fruit at their disposal. By this I mean that they were working with the most obvious pieces of the puzzle and they have thus the biggest harvest of large pieces with multi-column text in fairly good condition. This is not to say that unbroken, undamaged panels do not await discovery but after the long hiatus in the first 70 years after the initial documentation it has been less easy to find some of the complete or near complete blocks like those that early epigraphists found lying around.  

Fragment 45


Again we have a piece of the puzzle in fairly good condition with a wide expanse of nearly undamaged text. It is alternatively numbered Cousin 9 and Usener 21. It is missing a chunk excised from the top which only effects the first line of two columns. Its does however have some illegible patches, particularly at the bottom right and mid-left. 

Column 1

ναι φέρουσ[ιν, ουδέ κατά, την
αύτην άπ[α]ντες [δ]ε[ι]νοΰν-
ται ίδέ]αν, άλλ' οί μέν αύ-
τ]ών άλλήλοις συναντώ-
5          σ]ιν,οί δ' ου, και οί μέν τον όρ-
θον εως τινός περαιοΰ-
σι[ν] δρόμον, λοξόν δ' έτε
ροι, ώσπερ ό ήλιος και ή σ
ελήνη, οί δ[ε] τον αύτοΰ κύ-
10         κλον στρέφονται, καθά-
περ η άρκτος, ετι δ' οί μεν
ύψηλην ζώνην φέρον
ται, οί δ' αυ ταπεινην, και
γαρ τοΰτ' άγνοοΰσιν οί

Column 2

λοί, τον γοΰ]ν ηλιον ύπο-
λαρ.βάνουσιν ούτως ε
ίναι ταττεινον, ώσ~ερ φαί
νεται, [Λ7) οντα ούτως τα-
5          πεινόν. ει γαρ ην ούτως, έν
πυρίζεσΟαι την γην έδει
και τα έ~'
αύτης ττάντα <(πρ
ποάγ[λατα. την ούνάπό-
φασιν όρώαεν αύτοΰ τα-
10         πεινην, αλλ' b'/l αυτόν.
χλ[η]ν τοΰτο μεν παρενβε-
βλησθω, χερί
δ' ανατολών η δη λέγω-
αεν και δύτεων και των

Column 3 

εφεξής, έκ[ε]ϊνο προθέντες,
ότι τον ζητοΰντα τι περί
των άδηλων, αν βλέπη τους
του δυνατού τρόπους πλεί-
5          ονας, περί τοΰδέ τίνος
μόνον τολμηρον καταπο-
φαίνεσθαι. μάντεως γαρ
ααλλόν έστιν το τοιούτον
η ά[ν]δρος σοφοΰ. το μέντοι
10         λέγειν πάντας μεν ενδε
χομένους, πιθανώτερον
δ' είναι τόνδε τοΰδε ορθώς
έχει. ενδέχεται τοιγαρ-
ουν τον ηλιον άνθρακώ-

Column 4

δη τινά κύκλον [είναι και
λεπτον άκρως [ύπο σφοδρών
πνευμάτων α!ω[ρούμενον
πηγής τε επέχ[οντα τό-
5          π[ο]ν τοΰ μέν ά[πιόντος
εξ αύτοΰ πυρο[ς, τοΰ δε συν-
ρέοντος έκ τοΰ [σύμπαν
τοκςατά μεικ[οάς τινας
συνκρίσεις, δια [δε την
10         πολυμιγ[είαν αύτοΰ και έ-
παρκεϊν αύ[τό τοΰτο πέφυ-
κε τώ κόσμω [παντί. . ……
χοντος ενε………………..
τυνχανον………………….

The source here is Ernst Kalinka and Rudolf Heberdey, L'inscription philosophique d'Oenoanda in the Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Volume 21, 1897. pp. 386.

Fragments 37 & 38


Fragments 37 & 38 fit together quite obviously. While 37 is almost pristine, fragment 38 is broken off on its right side. These fragments are otherwise known as Cousin 4 and Usener 16.


Column 1

έστιν δια τε το έν τοΐς
πράγμασι ποικίλως ά-
στατον και το έμον ε-
ξωθε γήρας, τα περί ά-
5          πειρίας κόζμων, ώς ηξί-
ωσας, απέστειλα σοι. συν-
τυχία δε του πράγματ
οςάγα θη κέ/ρησαι*
πριν η γαρ έλθεϊν σου
10         την έπιστολην Θεο-
δωρίδας ό Λΐνδιος,
εταίρος ημών, δν ούκ ά-
γνοεϊς, αρχόμενος ετι
του φιλοσοφείν, τον

Column 2

αύτον επ[ρ]αττεν λό-
γον. έναρ[θ]ρότερος
δ' ούτος έγ[ε]ίνετο δια
το έν άμφι οϊ]ν ημεϊν
5          παρουσι στ[ρ]ε'φεσθαι.
αί γαρ εξ ά[λ]λήλων
συνκαταθ[ε'σε]ις τε
και άντιφ[άσει]ς ετι δ'
ερωτήσεις άκρειβεσ-
10         τέραν έπ[οΐο]υντο
του ζητ[ου]αε'νου
την ερε[υν]αν. δια τοΰ-
το ούν, Άν[τ]ίπατρε,
την διάλε[ςι]ν εκεί

Column 3
νην απέστειλα σοι, ίν[α
δη το ίσον γένηται τώ
κάν παρών αυτός
ομοίως Θεοδωρίδα
5          τα μεν ώμολόγεις, οίς
δ' έπηπόρεις, και προσ-
επυνθάνου. εστίν
δε αύτη τοιαυτηνεί τί
να την άρχην έχουσα'
10         ώ Διόγενες, ό Θεο-
δωρίδας εΐπεν, ότι
μεν αληθές έστιν
το Επικουρώ περί α
πειρίας κόσμων

Column 4

[ταβληθέν δόγμα κτλ.]
……………………………
…………………………….
…………………………….
……………………………
5          δρ.,……………………….
α………………………….
κ α……………………….
10         μα………………………
οίον[εί (?)……………
τι έν γέ|_νει (?)……….
Έπικουρ……………….
ρας περί [α. . …………


The source here is Ernst Kalinka and Rudolf Heberdey, L'inscription philosophique d'Oenoanda in the Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Volume 21, 1897. pp. 377.


Saturday, January 26, 2013

New Storage Depot


After nearly a century of exposure and depredation the task of protecting if not displaying the remains of Diogene's inscription has finally been taken in hand. In 2011, more than fifty fragments of the philosophical inscription, some of them weighing up to 500 kg, were salvaged from the terrain and moved to the depot built for them the previous year. Thus more than half of the known fragments are now safely stored in the building.




The Doyen of Oinoanda


While the circle of names associated with the Oinoandan scholarship is small the name that stands out most prominently in recent times is that of Professor Martin Ferguson Smith, OBE, MA, MLitt, LittD, FSA who currently holds the title as Emeritus Professor in the Department of Classics and Ancient History at Durham University. He was Professor of Classics there from 1988 to 1995 (Emeritus Professor thereafter).

He is internationally known as an editor and translator of Lucretius and as the discoverer and editor, over more than forty years, of extensive sections of the inscription set up by Diogenes of Oinoanda. The results of his work at Oinoanda has been presented in several books and about 60 articles. 

He was awarded the international Theodor Mommsen Prize for Herculaneum Papyrology in 2004. As well as remaining very active in classical research, including at Oinoanda, he has recently produced work on Rose Macaulay, Dorothy L Sayers, and Virginia Woolf. He was appointed OBE 'for services to scholarship' in 2007. Since 1995 he has lived on Foula, a remote and rugged island 20 miles west of the Shetland mainland.

We have already quoted from his many and various essays, his major works on the subject are the two volumes:
  • The Epicurean inscription / Diogenes of Oinoanda ; edited with introduction, translation and notes by Martin Ferguson Smith. 660 p., 18 p. of plates : ill., maps, plans ; 24 cm. Napoli : Bibliopolis, 1993.
  • Martin Ferguson Smith, Supplement to Diogenes of Oinoanda The Epicurean Inscription. Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Filosofici. La Scuola di Epicuro. Napoli: Bibliopolis, 2003. Pp. 156; figs. 6. ISBN 88-7088-441-4



Wednesday, January 23, 2013

Fragment 151


Martin Ferguson Smith restored Fragment 151 (NF 97) as:


[ὅπως ἡδονή, μη]-
[κέτι τῶ]ν διαλειμμα[ά]-
[των παρ]όντων, αὐτο-
[μάτως] προφαν βλά-
[πτουσα μ]ηδὲν τὴν φύ-
σιν.ω τὰ] γὰρ ὑγρὰ τροφεῖα



and translated it as:

... [in order that], when the interstices [are no longer there, pleasure] may appear of its of its own accord without doing any harm to the constitution. V For liquid [nourishment] ...

The source is Martin Ferguson Smith, Supplement to Diogenes of Oinoanda The Epicurean Inscription. Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Filosofici. La Scuola di Epicuro. Napoli: Bibliopolis, 2003. 

The Arrangement of the Inscription


It is interesting to ponder the layout of the inscription for it was a truly massive work extending for 80 (and in some versions 100) metres. 

Smith states his view on the lettering in the essay, JÜRGEN HAMMERSTAEDT – MARTIN FERGUSON SMITH DIOGENES OF OINOANDA: THE DISCOVERIES OF 2009 (NF 167–181) in: Epigraphica Anatolica 42 (2009) 1–38, as being: "Outside the titles of writings, the lettering in Diogenes’ inscription comes in three sizes, which in the descriptions below we call “small” (average c. 1.8–1.9 cm.), “medium (average c. 2.3–2.4 cm.), and “large” (average c. 2.9–3.0 cm.). The size of the lettering is determined mainly by the level at which writings were carved on the wall of the stoa, the writings at or near eye level having smaller letters than those higher up, although medium-sized letters are used both in the monolithic Maxims and in the maxims running through the lower margin of the Ethics, even though they were not high up on the wall, in order to make them more eye-catching.

Here it would be useful to quote Diskin Clay an esteemed scholar of the Inscription in his review of the Smith's book, Supplement to Diogenes of Oinoanda The Epicurean Inscription. Istituto Italiano per gli Studi Filosofici. La Scuola di Epicuro. Napoli: Bibliopolis, 2003. Pp. 156; figs. 6. ISBN 88-7088-441-4.  

Clay comments, "What every student of the inscription can now agree on (thanks to Diogenes' language locating the treatises of his inscription on upper and lower registers) is that the inscription occupied at least three registers. It was supported by an orthostate course. If only one of the orthostate blocks could be recovered and identified, we would have the foundation for a reconstruction of the stoa wall. Above, extending over three (in my view) or four (in Smith's view) registers are displayed a series of texts. They give the impression of a papyrus unrolled along the stoa wall. Along the lowest inscribed course we find the Ethics Treatise. Above it is the Physics Treatise; and topmost, inscribed over three courses, is the Old Age Treatise (written in larger letters and surely made more legible by rubrication). Not all of the blocks that fit into this vast architectural jigsaw puzzle count as "fragments". We have some "stretchers" whose texts are nearly perfectly preserved; and we have "headers," such as NF 132 (fr. 131 = YF 189), which contain entire maxims. This is the narrowest of Diogenes' maxims (written by Diogenes, as Smith and I agree, in imitation of Epicurus). The width is only 0.225m, so it is the narrowest of Diogenes' Maxims. Another "header" with a very similar and equally well preserved message is fr. 122. These can be described as Diogenes' "monolithic maxims."

But not every "fragment" is a fragment, and not every uninscribed block from the stoa wall is without interest in the arduous task of reconstructing his stoa. To date, the inscribed "headers" and "stretchers" of the upper courses of the wall have been recorded as components of the wall, but only a single rejected and uninscribed block from the upper courses of the wall has been published, and none of its orthostate blocks have been identified". 

Nicola Pace in his homage to the works of Grilli (Alberto Grilli, studioso dell’epigrafe di Diogene di Enoanda), comments on Grilli's differences with Smith on the placement of the texts: "....lo Smith, nella ricostruzione delle sezioni tematiche dell'epigrafe (si tratta de cinque fasce sovrapposte), aveva collocato alla base del muro 'etica, surmontata dalla fisica; ricordiamo che l'altezza delle pietre dell'etica (cm 61,5) e la maggiore di tutta l’epigrafe, ed è volta a contenere, sotto i 14 righi del testo di Diogene, un quindicesimo rigo, distanziato e ininterrotto, con l’esposizione delle sentenze di carattere etico di Epicuro (soprattutto Κυριαι Δοξαι), una sorta dunque di cornice inferiore che sottolineava l’importanza della sezione. Le sentenze di Epicuro, che contengono l’essenza morale dell’epicureismo, dovevano dunque per lo Smith costituire la base, il fondamento di tutto il messaggio dell’epigrafe. Grilli fa notare, a mio avviso con ragione, che, se è vero che da lì l’occhio di chi guardava l’epigrafe sarebbe partito, risalendo poi in alto verso le altre sezioni, avrebbe letto prima l’etica e poi la fisica, andando contro il normale ordine della trattazione filosofica epicurea, confermato dagli stessi richiami interni di Diogene. La fisica, secondo Grilli, doveva stare alla base, mentre la fascia dell’etica, collocandosi tra il metro e mezzo e i due metri circa di altezza, doveva essere più vicina all’occhio del lettore: proprio perché posta a questa altezza privilegiata, conteneva la fondamentale cornice delle sentenze. Vi è un altro motivo che spinge Grilli a questa collocazione: con lo scritto fisico in posizione superiore a quello etico non ci sarebbe stato un sufficiente stacco tra i due, in quanto «i margini superiori dello scritto etico e gl’inferiori dello scritto fisico sono esigui» Se consideriamo lo stacco alla base dello scritto sulla vecchiaia (la quinta e ultima fascia), costituito, oltre che da un margine consistente, da un fregio graffito di 10,5/14 cm (per un totale di 17/25 cm), non possiamo non rimanere perplessi di fronte a una mise en page così angusta per la parte inferiore dell’iscrizione, che contiene i due testi più importanti". 

Clearly only the finding of a significantly larger amount of pieces and their arrangement into a cohesive pattern will resolve these differences. The most significant find though would be the base of the walls of the stoa for this would resolve structural issues and give scholars a definitive view on the full extent of the text. 

Fragment 11


Fragment 11 was found by Cousin but could not be located by Kalinka and Heberdey.



Ο YT Ο Y r C
ca. .eiKuucnA
ΤΟΥΤΟΝΔΥΓ
κ α ι ο υ κ e τ
Ν H C ΔΙ ΑΤΟ

The source here is Ernst Kalinka and Rudolf Heberdey, L'inscription philosophique d'Oenoanda in the Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Volume 21, 1897. pp. 362.

Fragment 10


Fragment 10 was found in rubble in the square columned hall, south of the dividing wall by Kalinka and Haberdey. It measures. height: 0.38m, width : 0.38 m, thickness: 0.41 m 



ετι πολ-
γε]γηρακότας
τ]οϊς αύτοϊς και
ατον άψαμε-
5          ων [χηδ' δτι
θ]εϊν, ών είρη-
.... άρτιους




The source here is Ernst Kalinka and Rudolf Heberdey, L'inscription philosophique d'Oenoanda in the Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Volume 21, 1897. pp. 362.

Tuesday, January 22, 2013

Fragment 51


Fragment 51 is also known as Cousin 15 and Usener 12. It consists of two columns, which I show following each other... until I work out how to put them in columns..

First Column

περί του θανάτου λέγον-
τι καΐ πέπεικάς [/.ε κα-
ταγελαν αύτου. φοβού
μαι γαρ ούδεν δια τους
5          Τιτυους και τους '(Ταν^
Τ]ανταλους, οΰς <^άνα])-
άνα]γράφουσιν έν "Α-
δου] τίνες ούδε φρ[ί-
ττω] την μ[ύ]δησιν έν-
10        θυ{/.]ού|Λενος την
του σ]ώματος γε περ
λοικολαιγ . .
ψυχής <χ\ζ άρε
ταις. . . .] ούδ' άλλο

Second Column

ούδε'ν. δι
ταύτη δ
δη ότι στε
ζην και τ
5          προλείψω
ενταύθα
ρ.ετα τη[ν
φην |Ληδε
κον. ταυ
10        της ίσχυρ
ρος αύτοι
ποσκευη
δησειφαι
προς τους

The source here is Ernst Kalinka and Rudolf Heberdey, L'inscription philosophique d'Oenoanda in the Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Volume 21, 1897. pp. 394.

Monday, January 21, 2013

The Distribution of the Fragments


Below can be seen a map produced originally in Alan Hall's article The Oenoanda Survey: 1974-76 in Anatolian Studies, Vol. 26 (1976), pp. 191-197. It is extremely useful in showing the dispersion of pieces of the inscription found up until that date. While we can note that the heaviest concentration is bunched in the centre of the city on either side of the later wall that shrunk the city's dimensions, there are quite a large number of outlying fragments at some distance from the centre. 


It should be noted that more fragments have been found since the time of the article's writing (including a piece at the theatre). It should also be noted that virtually no excavation has been undertaken and that with the pieces found believed to be less than 30% of the total that once existed there still is substantial scope for discovery all over the site. 

Sunday, January 20, 2013

A Bibliography


G. W. Chilton, Diogenis Oenoandensis fragmenta (Leipzig, 1967).
C. W. Chilton, Diogenes of Oenoanda : The Fragments (London- New York-Toronto, 1971).
G. Cousin, « Inscriptions d'Oenoanda », BCH 16 (1892), p. 1-70.
A. Grilli, « I frammenti dell'epicureo Diogene da Enoanda », Studi di filosofia greca (Bari, 1950), p. 347-435.
A. Grilli, Diogenis Oenoandensis fragmenta (Milano, 1960).
R. Heberdey and E. Kalinka, « Die philosophische Inschrift von Oinoanda »,
БСЯ 21 (1897), p. 346-443.
R. E. Philippson, «Diogenes von Oinoanda», RE Suppl. 5 (1931), col. 153-170.
M. F. Smith, «Fragments of Diogenes of Oenoanda Discovered and Rediscovered », AJA 74 (1970), p. 51-62.

M. F. Smith, «Fifty-five New Fragments of Diogenes of Oenoanda, Anatolian
Studies Vol. xxvm (1978) 42-45, «The Arrangement of the Fragments».

M. F. Smith, « New Fragments of Diogenes of Oenoanda », AJA 75 (1971), p. 357-389.
M. F. Smith, « Observations on the Text of Diogenes of Oenoanda », Hermathena 110 (1970), p. 52-78.
M. F. Smith, « New Readings in the Text of Diogenes of Oenoanda », £0 22(1972), p. 159-162.
M. F. Smith, Thirteen New Fragmenls of Diogenes of Oenoanda, Denkschriften
der ôsterreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, phil.-hist. Klasse, 117
(Wien, 1974).
M. F. Smith, « Seven New Fragments of Diogenes of Oenoanda », Hermathena 118(1974), p. 110-129.
H. Usener, « Epikureische Schriften auf Stein », Bh. Mus. 47 (1892),
p. 414-456.
J. William, Diogenis Oenoandensis fragmenta (Leipzig, 1907).

Dr R. J. Ling, «Building Mk 1 at Oenoanda» in Anatolian Studies Vol. xxxı (1981) 31 - 53, le

Dr J. J. Coulton, «Oinoanda: The Doric Building (Mk 2)>> in Anatolian Studies Vol. XXXıı (1982) 45 - 59,

Dr J. J. Coulton, «The Buildings of Oinoanda» in The Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society (1983) 
Lang G.J., Klassische Antike Stätten Anatoliens. Band 2: Larissa-Zeleia, Norderstedt 2003
Bean G.E., Lycian Turkey. An archaeological guide, London – New York 1978
Coulton J.J., "Termessians at Oinoanda", Anatolian Studies, 32, 1982, 115-131
Coulton J.J., "The buildings of Oinoanda", PCPS, 209, 1983, 1-20
Coulton J.J., "Oinoanda. The Agora", Anatolian Studies, 36, 1986, 61-90
Coulton J.J., "Highland Cities in South-West Turkey: the Oinoanda and Balboura Surveys", Matthews, R., Ancient Anatolia. Fifty Years’ Work by the British Institute of Archaeology at Ankara, Oxford 1998, 225-236
Coulton J.J., Milner N.P., Hall A.S., "The mausoleum of Licinnia Flavilla and Flavianus Diogenes of Oinoanda. Epigraphy and architecture", Anatolian Studies, 46, 1996, 111-144
Elton H., "Oinoanda", NPauly 8, 2000, 1143
Hill G.F., "Oinoanda", NC, 17, 1897, 25-30
Livrea E., "Sull’Iscrizione Teosofica di Enoanda", ZPE, 122, 1998, 90-96
Milner N.P., "New votive reliefs from Oinoanda", Anatolian Studies, 44, 1994, 65-76
Mitchell S., "Festivals, Games and Civic Life in Roman Asia Minor", JRS, 80, 1990, 183-193
Bean G.E., "Oinoanda", R. Stillwell, W. L. MacDonald, M. Holland McAllister, PECS, Princeton N.J. 1976, 240-241
Robert L., "Un oracle gravé à Oinoanda", CRAI, 1971, 597-619
Smith, Martin Ferguson Diogenes of Oinoanda. The Epicurean Inscription,  (επιμ.), Napoli 1993
Smith M.F., "New readings in the Demostheneia inscription from Oinoanda", Anatolian Studies, 44, 1994, 59-64
Smith M.F., The philosophical inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda, Wien 1996
Smith M.F., "A new reading in Diogenes of Oinoanda fr. 69", CQ, 49, 1999, 639-640
Smith M.F., "Fresh Thoughts on Diogenes of Oinoanda fr. 68", ZPE, 133, 2000, 51-55
Smith M.F., "The introduction to Diogenes Oinoanda’s Physics", CQ, 50, 2000, 238-246
Smith M.F., "Digging up Diogenes: new Epicurean texts from Oinoanda in Lycia", Erler, M., Bees, R., Epikureismus in der späten Republik und der Kaiserzeit. Akten der 2. Tagung der Karl-und-Gertrud-Abel-Stiftung vom 30. September - 3. Oktober 1998 in Würzburg, Stuttgart 2000, 64-75
Smith M.F., Warren J., "The Philosophical Inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda", JHS, 119, 1999, 194-195
Wörrle M., "Polis et chora à Oinoanda de Cibyratide. Perplexitès d’interprétation devant un document nouveau", Frézouls, E., Sociétés urbaines, sociétés rurales dans l’Asie Mineure et la Syrie hellénistiques et romaines Actes du Colloque de Strasbourg, novembre 1985, Strasbourg 1987, 115-116
Wörrle M., Stadt und Fest im kaiserzeitlichen Kleinasien. Studien zu einer agonistischen Stiftung aus Oinoanda, München 1988, Vestigia 39
Stenton E. C., "Oinoanda. The Water Supply and Aqueduct", Anatolian Studies, 36, 1986, 15-29


The City Of Oinoanda


The ancient city of Oinoanda ( Greek: Οινόανδα)  is located on the border of the Cibyratis in the remote and rugged mountain region of northern Lycia, in the upper valley of the River Xanthus. It was the most southerly of the tetrapolis led by Cibyra (with Bubon and Balbura) in the Hellenistic Period. This was dissolved by L. Licinius Murena in 84 BCE, whereupon Oinoanda became part of the koinon of Lycia, as its inscriptions abundantly demonstrate. The early history of the settlement is obscure, in spite of an exploratory survey carried out, with permission of the Turkish authorities, by B.I.A.A. in 1974-76.


The site of the city is a broad saddle-ridge between two high hills, at an altitude of approximately 1400m. The hill that rises to the north of the settlement, Eren Tepe (1532m), is sometimes referred to as the acropolis, although it is not integrated into the urban structure. Because of the sharply undulating terrain, public spaces - the paved agora and the so-called Esplanade - could be accommodated only in the northern part of the city, while most of the other structural remains occupy sloping sites. The map below shows the centre of the city. 






In the opinion of Alan Hall, "...the original fortification of the site took place in the late Third or early Second Century B. C., under Pergamene influence. After that period we cannot give a certain date to any other structure until the early Empire: which suggests that either the Hellenistic public buildings were removed by later reconstruction, or that the site was largely vacant during this early period of its history, or that we simply cannot see the relevant remains under present conditions. We can be sure, however, thanks to recent work, that the aqueduct is Flavian, and that the older of the two bath buildings was probably built at the· same time; and this implies other building activity in the early Empire, including, probably, a theatre and a gymnasium. The Agora with its porticoes in Antonine and Severan period, and so is the second and later bath building, together with the porticoes nearby, which may have included the stoa used by Diogenes the Epıcurean.

By the middle of the Third Century A.D., insecurity led to the construction of a new fortification wall, which can be dated to about 270 A.D., and which brought about a drastic restriction in the defended area. Within it, a major basilican church belongs to the early Fourth Century. Thereafter, the position is unclear. The aqueduct was repaired several times, but eventually abandoned. Late Roman housing within the southern and north - eastern sectors of the site shows continued occupation, but the population must gradually have dwindled. The public buildings were abandoned and soon collapsed, their ruins suggesting that it may have 'been partly the result of earthquakes".

At the southwestern extremity of the city is a well preserved section of the aforementioned wall fortified with two towers. The wall is intersected at a tangent by the Flavian aqueduct, which is equally well preserved and spans the dip between the wall and the neighbouring hill to the south.The waterline has been traced through some 4 km of dense forest to its source in springs to the south.

On the plain to the east of the urban area lies the present-day village of Incealiler, from which a footpath now leads up to the site. The map below shows the broader surrounding of the city including the more distant acropolis. 



The site of the city of Oinoanda was discovered and identified by British explorers, Hoskyns and Forbes, in 1841, and published in the Journal of the Royal Geographical Society, xii (1843). The first plan of the site was published as early as 1847. But subsequently there was no thorough exploration of the site or indeed of any individual structures, some of which are in a good state of preservation. Instead, scholarly interest was focused entirely on the inscriptions, especially on the fragments of a philosophical inscription, which first came to light in 1884 and, with the discovery of 88 fragments by 1895. In the process of further study and research, it became clear that the inscription was the largest known from the ancient world. 

The site remains however rather sporadically explored. It is interesting to speculate on why this might be so. One reason could be that it was a relatively minor city in antiquity with no famous events of personalities associated with it. The discovery of the inscription however means that the city probably deserves an out-sized consideration. J. J. Coulton has described Oinoanda as, «a typical small city of substantial but not unusual prosperity», during the Roman period. 

The city has never been overbuilt so is in fairly good condition. Also because it lacks nearby later town of much consideration it was not heavily raided for building materials (spolia).


The photo above shows the main area of the city as it is today with a lightly wooded cover. The city had a spectacular location overlooking the local region. 

More Recent Discoveries


A new chapter in the history of research at Oinoanda opened in 1968 when Martin Ferguson Smith began investigations on the site, focusing on Diogenes' inscription, of which he was able to recover a further 38 new fragments. Smith was furthermore able to relocate most of the fragments found in the 19th century and to submit them to fresh analysis. From 1974 his project was accompanied by a survey undertaken over many years by the BIAA (British Institute at Ankara), initially directed by Alan Hall. This survey represented the first thoroughgoing exploration of the topography and structures of Oinoanda, and also led to the discovery of a further 86 fragments of Diogenes' inscription, which were published successively by Smith .

The greatest number of inscription fragments was found in the area of the so-called Esplanade, identified as the older, Hellenistic agora of the city. In 1997, a small excavation, conducted by BIAA in collaboration with Fethiye Museum, with Smith as scientific director, brought to light several more blocks of Diogenes' inscription on the Esplanade. This was the first and only archaeological excavation at Oinoanda in the 20th century. In the framework of the BIAA survey, explorations were undertaken that opened up the territory of the ancient city. Of particular note were campaigns in 2008 and 2009. These proved useful at turning up new fragments and also rediscovering old fragments. By the end of the 2009 campaign there were only 43 fragments from the 19th century surveys still unaccounted for. 

Commenting in their work, JÜRGEN HAMMERSTAEDT – MARTIN FERGUSON SMITH DIOGENES OF OINOANDA: THE DISCOVERIES OF 2009 (NF 167–181) in: Epigraphica Anatolica 42 (2009) 1–38, the authors state, "It is very likely that most of the 43 stones that are still missing cannot at present be found because they are buried in the numerous heaps of rubble produced by the French and Austrian epigraphists in the nineteenth century and by illegal excavators in recent decades. It should be mentioned that a group of 38 small fragments, which have been buried on the site at a location that is known only to those who are responsible for the work at Oinoanda".

Illegal excavations have been noted at the site. Fortunately, up until now, inscriptions have seemed boring to illegal diggers.  

Research activities at Oinoanda have fluctuated in recent years due to mood swings by Turkish authorities. This was despite notable results from previous campaigns and the vulnerability of the site to pillaging.

Work did recommence in the current decade with a survey of the city walls and a salvage operation of many of the pieces of the inscription into a depot. During these surface surveys in 2011, a further 16 new fragments of the inscription came to light. One of the newly discovered pieces on the subject of physics fits together with existing fragments, resulting in a continuous sequence of text now nearly 5 m long which can be read in its entirety for the first time. 



This gives a spectacular foretaste of what the original may have looked like, in part, and the potential to recreate the whole inscription at the end of a concerted exploration effort to glean all the pieces still extant on the site. 

Key questions  though remains about the architectural conception of Diogenes' inscription and its relationship to its urban surroundings. Little is known too about the successive phases of the development of the city and the diachronic change that took place in public spaces. The resumption of archaeological investigations at Oinoanda can moreover be expected to yield further finds of inscriptions. 

The Early History of the Rediscovery

In his paper, Fragments of Diogenes of Oenoanda Discovered and Rediscovered, by Martin Ferguson Smith (American Journal of Archaeology, Vol. 74, No. 1 (Jan., 1970), pp. 51-62) he gives a brief summary of the early years of the rediscovery of the inscriptions. 

"The Epicurean Diogenes was unknown until, between 1884 and 1895, substantial fragments of his great philosophical inscription, carefully carved on blocks of local limestone and dating from about A.D. 200, were discovered by French and Austrian archaeologists in the Lycian city of Oenoanda.

In 1892 G. Cousins published the 64 fragments discovered by him and his French colleagues. However, he failed to provide drawings, measurements, or even detailed descriptions of the stones, and his copying was sometimes inaccurate and incomplete. In 1895 the Austrians R. Heberdey and E. Kalinka, answering an appeal made by H. Usener (who in 1892 had re-edited all but the most fragmentary of the fragments, making many brilliant restorations and valuable comments), re-examined all those edited by Cousin which they could find (there were thirteen which they were unable to find), and discovered twenty-four new fragments. They took measurements of the stones and made a careful scale drawing of each block. As Chilton points out, it is upon the text of Heberdey and Kalinka that subsequent work on the inscription has been chiefly based. This work has been admirable. By far the most valuable contribution has been made by J. William, editor of the first Teubner text published in 1907, who with wonderful skill arranged the fragments in their probable order and made numerous restorations.

His text has been further improved by other scholars, notably R . Philippson, A. Grilli, who has produced an Italian translation and commentary and, more recently, a text of the fragments," and Chilton himself, who has soundly edited the second Teubner text published in 1967".

The Teubner volume of 1907 referred to here is Diogenes Oenoandensis Fragmenta by J. William. It can be found online in its full form here.