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.
XENOPHANES
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.
HERACLITUS
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 
.
PARMENIDES
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.
ZENO
76 T3. Omitting 
with MS T and Zeller.
77 T3. Retaining 
with Aristotle’s MSS.
79 F1. I read 
.
MELISSUS
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) 
…
ANAXAGORAS
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.
EMPEDOCLES
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.
ATOMISTS
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.
DIOGENES
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.
PROTAGORAS
216 T11. I read 
[
].
T11. Reading 
with Richards.
218 T12. I omit 
as a reduplicated gloss.
GORGIAS
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 
.
PRODICUS
247 F1. Retaining 
with the MSS.
ANTIPHON
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 
.
DOUBLE ARGUMENTS
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.