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

Fragment 151

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

[ὅπως ἡδονή, μη]-

[κέτι τῶ]ν διαλειμμα[ά]-

[των παρ]όντων, αὐτο-

[μάτως] προφανῇ 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.

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.