I'm an Epicurean, not a mathematician, so I'm not confident with my numbers.

Even so, the dates and ages that Diogenes Laërtius presents do not add up (according to my calculations).

*If* Epicurus was born in the early months of 341 BCE, then his 72^{nd} birthday would have landed in the early months of 269 BCE (the * 3^{rd}* year of the 127

^{th}Olympiad) and

**not**270

**BCE (the**

*year of the of 127*

**2**^{nd}^{th}Olympiad). Therefore, it must either be the case that (

**a**) Epicurus died when he was 71 (and

*not*72) during the archonship of

*Sosistratus*, or else (

**b**) he died in 269 BCE during the archonship of

*Pytharatus*.

*Otherwise*, Epicurus would have to have been born in the

*2*year of the 109th Olympiad (early 342 BCE) during the archonship of

^{nd}*Pythodotus*(and

*not*the 3

^{rd}year [342-341 BCE] during the archonship of

*Sosigenes*).

**Either way**, Diogenes’ propositions that Epicurus (

**1**) was born in the “

*third year of the 109th Olympiad*[342-341 BCE]

*during the archonship of Sosigenes”*, that (

**2**) he died “

*in the second year of the 127th Olympiad, in the archonship of Pytharatus*[271-270 BCE]” and that (3) he died “

*at the age of seventy-two*” cannot all be true. Diogenes is either mistaking the dates, or Epicurus’ age.

Given the clarity of the archonships that Diogenes presents, which is supported by other authors, __I suppose that Diogenes made an error: ____Epicurus died when he was 71____ (not 72)__.