“then truly the life of the gods will pass to men”: Contemplating Diogenes of Oenoanda’s Golden Age Wim Nijs PICUREANS are well known for their preoccupation with the present and their avoidance of the anxieties that may E be caused by fretting over the uncontrollable future. Since one can only exert direct influence over the present, the only viable strategy to enhance ataraxia and increase one’s hap- piness is to enjoy the present moment to the fullest by living it in accordance with the principles of Epicurean doctrine. 1. Thinking about the present, but keeping one eye on the future? When Diogenes of Oenoanda in Lycia, a wealthy citizen as well as an Epicurean philosopher, decided that, before he died,1 he wanted to share the benefits of Epicurean doctrine with present and future citizens and visitors of Oenoanda, he had stonemasons cover a stoa’s wall with a monumental inscription containing treatises on ethics, physics, and old age. Although this wall is no longer standing and the stone blocks of the inscription have been re-used elsewhere in the city, many fragments of the text have been recovered and reassembled, gradually enabling us to gain some insight in Diogenes’ philosophical legacy. One of these recovered fragments, NF 184, shows that Dioge- nes was no exception with regard to the typically Epicurean orientation towards the present, rather than to the uncertain 1 As far as Diogenes’ life and death are concerned, we know only that he probably lived during the first half of the second century A.D. and that he commissioned the work on the inscription as an old man. Cf. M. F. Smith, Diogenes of Oinoanda. The Epicurean Inscription (Naples 1993) 35–48. ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 59 (2019) 242–261 2019 Wim Nijs WIM NIJS 243 future:2 τò παρòν δε[.]ῖ ποιεῖν τέλε[.]ι- [ο]ν, οὐ πρὸς τò ἀ- πολειπόµενον 4 ζ̣ῆν λέγοντα· ἕ[ως] ἂ̣ν ἔτι µοι γένηται τ̣ό̣δ̣ε καὶ τόδε. One must make the present perfect, and not live with an orien- tation to the future, saying: Until such and such a thing still happens to me. Nevertheless, this same Diogenes has also produced the extra- ordinary fr.56, describing what seems to be a future Golden Age of Epicureanism, when the life of the gods will pass to men. Being unparalleled in any other Epicurean writing we know of, this apparent Fremdkörper continues to puzzle scholars with its at first sight seemingly un-Epicurean interest in the future. In this article I will try to determine whether Diogenes’ Golden Age should be read as a plausible scenario for a yet undefined period in the future, or as a mere hypothesis with no plausibility whatsoever. Then I will attempt to determine how fr.56 could have been conceptualized as a functional part within the framework of orthodox Epicurean ethics. To do so I will focus on fr.56, col. I.1–12, which deals with the conditions for the Golden Age as well as its general characteristics: [τὴν µὲν οὖν σοφίαν οὐ πανταχοῦ κοµι]- οῦµεν, ἐπεὶ πάντες µὴ δύνανται. δυνατὴν δὲ αὐτὴν ἂν ὑποθ̣ώ̣µ̣ε̣θα̣, 4 τότε ὡς ἀληθῶς ὁ τῶν θεῶν βίος εἰς ἀνθρώπους µεταβήσεται. δικαιο- σύνης γὰρ ἔσται µεστὰ 2 Text and translation provided by Smith in J. Hammerstaedt and M. F. Smith, The Epicurean Inscription of Diogenes of Oinoanda. Ten Years of New Discoveries and Research (Bonn 2014) 125–126. ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 59 (2019) 242–261 244 DIOGENES OF OENOANDA’S GOLDEN AGE 8 πάντα καὶ φιλαλληλίας, καὶ οὐ γενήσεται τειχῶν ἢ νόµων χρεία καὶ πάν- των ὅσα δι᾿ ἀλλήλους 12 σκευωρούµεθα. [So we shall not achieve wisdom universally], since not all are capable of it. But if we assume it to be possible, then truly the life of the gods will pass to men. For everything will be full of justice and mutual love, and there will come to be no need of fortifica- tions or laws and all the things which we contrive on account of one another. If we contrast NF 184 with fr.56, at first sight the latter’s orientation to the future does not seem to be compatible with the Epicurean’s explicit focus on the present. Why does Diogenes ask his reader not to look to the future, while at the same time enthusiastically depicting an idealized future? G. Roskam and more recently P.-M. Morel3 have offered a possible solution to this apparent discrepancy. According to them, we should not read fr.56 as an actual description of a time to come, but rather as a strictly hypothetical future, possibly even an obiter dictum following an explicit confirmation of the hypothesis’ unreality. Morel argues that, although the future tense does indeed seem to suggest a description of a time to come, the construction of a subjunctive with ἄν rather expresses eventuality, while τότε does not necessarily refer to a point in time. Furthermore, Morel points out that Hermarchus also writes about the possibility of a universal grasp of Epicurean wisdom as a distinct unreality.4 If we follow this line of thought, fr.56 can indeed be read as a hypothesis with strong protreptic qualities, rather than as a pre- diction of a realistic future. Diogenes invites his readers as it were 3 G. Roskam, Live unnoticed (Λάθε βιώσας). On the Vicissitudes of an Epicurean Doctrine (Leiden/Boston 2007) 134–135; P.-M. Morel, “La terre entière, une seule patrie. Diogène d’Oenanda et la politique,” in J. Hammerstaedt et al. (eds.), Diogenes of Oinoanda. Epicureanism and Philosophical Debates / Diogène d’Oeno- anda. Épicurisme et controverses (Leuven 2017) 236–240. 4 Herm. ap. Porph. Abst. I 8.4 (= fr.34 Longo Auricchio): εἰ δὲ πάντες ἐδύ- ναντο βλέπειν ὁµοίως καὶ µνηµονεύειν τὸ συµφέρον, οὐδὲν ἂν προσεδέοντο νόµων. ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 59 (2019) 242–261 WIM NIJS 245 to join him in the intellectual exercise of envisioning an Epi- curean Golden Age, starting with the premise that in this hypo- thetical time universal wisdom is possible. Since philosophical practice in the Epicurean Garden probably consisted of the application of Epicurean doctrine to all kinds of practical situa- tions, it is safe to assume that for an Epicurean thinker Diogenes’ Golden Age would be a marvellous intellectual playground where all facets of Epicurean doctrine could be explored without being hampered by the limitations of real life. 2. Diogenes’ garrulity: the Golden Age as an obiter dictum? Yet I believe that the purpose of fr.56 entails more than just being an interesting philosophical exercise. In light of the Epi- curean focus on living the good life in the present, it is highly unlikely Diogenes would have aimed to encourage his readers to actively look forward to the coming of a Golden Age. Not only would such an encouragement be rather unusual for an Epicu- rean, but it could even be counterproductive to Diogenes’ over- all project, since his intended readers, neophytes who have only just started to take their first steps toward Epicureanism, could very well be distracted from the doctrinal preoccupation with the present, as expressed by Diogenes’ own words in NF 184. Nonetheless, I will argue Diogenes can have considered the Golden Age of fr.56 to be plausible without diverging from the orthodox position or undermining his own project. First I must confront Roskam’s suggestion that the hypothesis of fr.56 may be an obiter dictum after the explicit negation of its plausibility. The conjecture that Smith provides for the words preceding col. I.1 certainly supports this reading. In line 1 Diogenes clearly indicates that something is (at least in the present) impossible for us, “since not all are capable of it.” Although the exact nature of this impossible feat was presumably specified in the preceding lines that are lost to us, the surviving lines strongly suggest that the aforesaid impossibility concerns a necessary condition for the Epicurean good life. If we follow Smith, this currently unattainable good is a state of universal wisdom, condicio sine qua non for the realisation of the Golden Age. Smith also completes the remaining part of the ————— Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Studies 59 (2019) 242–261 246 DIOGENES OF OENOANDA’S GOLDEN AGE verb form -οῦµεν to [κοµι]οῦµεν, which would indeed imply that the necessary conditions for the Golden Age will not be reached in the future either. However, this conjecture is the only factor that definitively excludes the possibility of a plausible, albeit not per se real future of universal Epicureanism. If we change Smith’s restoration so that it more or less retains its meaning, replacing [κοµι]οῦµεν however with a verb in the present tense rather than the future, fr.56 will no longer rule out the possibility of universal Epicureanism in the future, but will only state that nowadays not all people are capable of reaching such wisdom, making a kind of Golden Age impossible in the present, but not necessarily in the future.5 As mentioned above, fr.56 is perfectly compatible with Epi- curean thought and practice by reading it as nothing more than an intellectual exercise, which would fit well with the daily prac- tice of philosophical conversation in the Athenian Garden or any other Epicurean circle of friends. However, this fragment is not part of a conversation with like-minded friends: instead, it is part of Diogenes’ grand project of making Epicurean doctrine accessible to anyone passing the inscription, Greeks and bar- barians alike, so long as they have the right disposition towards a philosophical lifestyle. If Diogenes’ aim is to provide potential students of Epicureanism with a representative overview of Epi- curean doctrine, the topics covered in his inscription should be representative and relevant.