Note that since the punctuation of many Presocratic fragments, particularly those of Heraclitus and Parmenides, is difficult and variable, I have not here indicated places where I punctuate the text differently from DK, but only those where I adopt a different reading of the Greek text itself.
27 F8.1. It does not substantially alter the translation, but I prefer the form of this first line given e.g. by Edmonds and Lesher to that found in DK.
28 F14. 2–3. Reading (Edmonds) for the unmetrical and nonsensical MSS , and therefore omitting Diels’s addenda.
29 T6. I conjecture .
T7. Reading (Gomperz) for the MSS (‘seals’), and then a little later (Lloyd-Jones) for the nonsensical MSS .
F16. 1. I marginally prefer ’, as found in Plutarch’s citation of the fragment at On Listening to Poetry 17e, to Sextus’ . Sextus’ reading would give the sense: ‘No man has seen the truth, nor will there ever be one who knows about the gods …’ I cannot see that this reference to the sense modality of sight is relevant here.
38 F3. The text is uncertain. The best reading seems to me to be that of Gigon: … With an alternative text, the fragment could be translated ‘… to know the judgement which guides …’, thus referring the ‘judgement’ to the divine logosrather than to human intellect.
F6. Reading, with recent editors: …
F8. I agree with Robinson that only this much of what DK print as fr. 72 is genuinely Heraclitean.
40 F20. Reading with Dilcher.
41 F32. Omitting with all recent editors, and then a little later reading, with Pfleiderer, instead of .
41 F35. Reading with Mansfeld.
42 F36. Omitting as part of the context from Clement.
F37. Omitting Burnet’s . For a parallel use of , see Herodotus, Histories 6.H 9.
F38. Retaining with the MSS.
43 T8. Reading with Reiske.
44 F47. Reading … with the majority of the ancient authors who preserve this fragment.
F49. Reading, with Mouraviev: .
46 F61. Retaining the MSS .
56 F1. 3. Retaining with the MSS.
F1. 3. Reading with Meineke.
57 F1. 24–5. Reading with Brandis, and then with MSS NL.
58 F3. 1. Retaining with the MSS.
F3. 4. Retaining with the MSS.
F5. 3. Reading with Nehamas (instead of Diels’s conjectured ), and taking the elided pronoun as dative.
F5. 5. Reading with the Aldine edition.
59 F8. 2. Reading rather than , since the preposition follows what it governs.
F8. 4. Retaining the majority reading .
F8. 4. Reading with Owen.
F8. 7. Retaining with the MSS.
F8. 12. Reading (Reinhardt) (Karsten).
F8. 19. Retaining the MSS
60 F8. 22. Reading with Owen.
61 F8. 55. Reading with the MSS.
F8. 61. Reading with Stein.
62 T6. Reading with Karsten.
63 F13. 4. Reading with MS Moscow State Historical Museum 3649.
65 F18. 1–2. Reading with Stephanus, and then with Theophrastus.
76 T3. Omitting with MS T and Zeller.
77 T3. Retaining with Aristotle’s MSS.
79 F1. I read .
86 F8. Bracketing as a gloss, with Barnes.
PYTHAGORAS AND FIFTH-CENTURY PYTHAGOREANISM
95 T4. Reading with Burkert.
96 T5. Transposing the second and third lines with Zuntz.
104 T30. I have silently incorporated a couple of minor changes to de Falco’s text: see my article in Classical Quarterly, 38 (1988), at p. 227.
109 T40. Retaining the MSS reading .
111 F7. Retaining the MSS reading, largely: (Wachsmuth) …
122 F1. I agree with Sider that the fragment ends here, without the explanatory sentence: ‘For these [air and aither] are the greatest ingredients, in terms of both number and size, in the mixture of all things.’
F2. Reading with MS F and Sider.
F5. Omitting with Sider.
124 F7. Reading with Jöhrens.
125 F10. Omitting with Wasserstein.
127 F12. Supplying the one missing definite article before , with recent editors.
F12. Reading with Schorn.
F13. Reading with Sider.
F13. Retaining with the MSS.
141 F1. 1. Reading with recent editors.
F1. 5. Reading with recent editors.
F1. 7. Reading with Wright.
142 F5. 1–2. Reading with Wright.
143 F6. 6. Reading with Stein.
F6. 9. Retaining with the MSS, and punctuating with Bollack.
F7. 5. Reading with Bergk.
F8. 1. Reading with Wright.
144 F8. 4. Reading with Marcovich.
145 F11. 1. Reading with Wright.
F14. 1. Reading with Burnet.
F14. 5. Reading with Karsten.
146 F16. 1. Reading with some MSS.
F16. 2. Retaining with the MSS.
F16. 4. Reading with Sider.
F17. 1. Retaining with the principal MSS.
F17. 6. Reading with Karsten.
147 F18. 1. Reading with Lloyd-Jones.
F19. 6. Reading (or ) with Diels.
148 F20. 8a. Following O’Brien, I repeat this line too (as well as line 9) from DK B26.
F20. 18. Reading with some of the ancient sources.
F20. 20. Reading with Sextus Empiricus, Against the Physicists 2.317 and Athenagoras 22.
F20. 33. Reading with Bollack.
149 F21.3. Reading with P. Strasb. gr. Inv. 1665–1666.
F21. 6. Reading with Kingsley.
F21. 10. Reading instead of , with some MSS and recent editors.
151 F24. 2. Diels’s conflation of two fragments to make up his B27 is not necessary, and makes bad sense grammatically. It is best to keep them apart, as two incomplete sentences.
F24. 4. Reading with the MSS.
152 F28. 2. Reading with P. Strasb. gr. Inv. 1665–1666.
153 F31. 8. Reading with the Aldine edition.
F32. 8. Reading with Fabricius.
F32. 10. Retaining with the MSS.
F35. 4. Omitting line 4 of this fragment, with Knatz.
F35. 7. Reading with Wilamowitz.
154 F36. 2. Retaining with the MSS.
F38. 2–3. Reading (Zuntz, Hermann).
F38. 3. Reading with Bergk.
155 F41. 7. Reading with Förster.
F41. 8. Omitting, with recent editors, the line made up by Blass and inserted by DK as l. 9 of this fragment.
F42. 12. Reading with Bollack.
F42. 13. Reading with Stein.
156 F42. 22. Reading with some MSS and Bollack.
T12. Omitting Diels’s addition .
157 T12. Retaining with the MSS.
T12. Reading with the MSS and Bollack.
T12. Along with recent editors I count as part of Theophrastus’ text, not of the Empedocles fragment, and so exclude Karsten’s additional .
T12. Reading for , with Frenkian.
158 T14. Reading with some MSS.
159 T17. Reading Super qua re Empedocles disputata ratione talia profatur with the MSS and Jahn.
F44. 4. Reading with Dodds.
160 F45. 2. Reading , after the MSS of Plutarch.
162 T29. Reading with Forster.
178 T13. Reading instead of , with Diels.
180 T13. I see no reason to assume a lacuna at this point, as Diels did.
T13. Reading with McDiarmid.
T13. Reading with McDiarmid.
T13. I delete .
181 T13. I omit .
183 T19. I read .
186 T24. There seems no good reason to delete the rest of this sentence.
188 F6. Reading with Cherniss.
189 T33. Reading [apparently omitted by accident in DK] with Wimmer.
197 F3. Reading with Solmsen.
198 F6. Reading with MSS DE.
199 T7. I read .
202 F8. Reading with Peck.
F8. Transposing these words with Thompson.
216 T11. I read .
T11. Reading with Richards.
218 T12. I omit as a reduplicated gloss.
228 F1. There seems no urgent need to assume that the text contains a lacuna here.
229 F1. Reading with MacDowell.
F1. Reading with MacDowell.
F1. For the last three sentences I read MacDowell’s text, which contains conjectures by Diels, Blass, Croiset, and himself: .
230 F1. Reading with Sauppe.
F1. Reading with MacDowell.
231 F1. Adding with Immisch.
F1. Reading with MacDowell.
F2. Deleting Sauppe’s addition at this point.
238 T12. Reading with Mansfeld.
T12. Reading .
247 F1. Retaining with the MSS.
262 F5. I see no particular reason to include the supplementary text of Diels and Bücheler.
264 F16. Reading with Morrison.
F17. I have translated the text to be found in Corpus dei papiri filosofici greci e latini, i. 184–6.
F18. I have translated the text to be found in Corpus dei papiri filosofici greci e latini, i. 192 ff.
265 F18. Retaining with the papyrus, here and in the next few lines.
266 F19. I have translated the text to be found in Corpus dei papiri filosofici greci e latini, i. 215–17.
268 T7. I read .
288 1. 13. There is no need to supplement the text with Diels’s additions here or in the next line.
290 2. 10. Again, there is no need for Diels’s supplement.
2. 17. There is no need for Valckenaer’s supplement.
291 2. 24. There is no need for Diels’s .
292 2. 28. Reading Diels’s text but without and with the last word as (MS P).
3. 2. As usual, Diels’s additions are unnecessary.
3. 7. Reading with Robinson, and therefore omitting Diels’s supplementary material.
293 3. 14. Reading with the MSS.
294 4. 6. Omitting Diels’s addition.
4. 6. Reading with Blass.
4. 7. Omitting Diels’s .
4. 8. Reading … with Robinson.
295 5. 13. Diels’s addition is unnecessary.
296 5. 15. Reading … with Robinson.
6. 4. Reading with the MSS.
6. 10. Retaining with the MSS.
297 6. 13. Retaining with the MSS.
8. 2. Omitting Diels’s addition.
298 8. 7. I read .
298 8. 13. Reading and with the MSS, but otherwise including Diels’s first addition, and Blass’s second addition. In other words, I follow Robinson’s text here.
9. 1. Retaining with the MSS.
9. 2. Retaining with the MSS at this point rather than at the end of the next sentence.
ANONYMOUS AND MISCELLANEOUS TEXTS
305 F1. 7. Reading with Grotius.
F1. 18–19. Omitting these lines as superfluous, with Blaydes.
306 F1. 24. Reading with Heath.
F1. 25. Reading with Diggle.
F1. 33. Reading with Aëtius.
F1. 37. Reading with Meineke.
F1. 38. Reading with Diggle.
310 T2. I read .
T2. Retaining with the MSS.