Sei sulla pagina 1di 929

PLOTINUS

The Enneads

edited by

LLOYD P. GERSON

University of Toronto

translated by

GEORGE BOYS-STONES

Durham University

JOHN M. DILLON

Trinity College, Dublin

LLOYD P. GERSON

University of Toronto

R.A.H. KING

University of Berne, Switzerland

ANDREW SMITH

University College, Dublin

JAMES WILBERDING

Ruhr Universita¨t Bochum

KING University of Berne, Switzerland ANDREW SMITH University College, Dublin JAMES WILBERDING Ruhr Universita¨t Bochum
University Printing House, Cambridge cb2 8bs , United Kingdom One Liberty Plaza, 20 th Floor,

University Printing House, Cambridge cb2 8bs , United Kingdom

One Liberty Plaza, 20th Floor, New York, ny 10006 , usa

477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, vic 3207 , Australia

314 321 , 3 rd Floor, Plot 3 , Splendor Forum, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi 110025 , India

79 Anson Road, # 06 04 / 06, Singapore 079906

Cambridge University Press is part of the University of Cambridge.

It furthers the University’s mission by disseminating knowledge in the pursuit of education, learning, and research at the highest international levels of excellence.

www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/ 9781107001770 doi : 10. 1017 / 9780511736490

© Lloyd P. Gerson, George Boys Stones, John M. Dillon, R.A.H. King, Andrew Smith, and James Wilberding 2018

This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press.

First published 2018

Printed in the United Kingdom by Clays, St Ives plc

A catalogue record for this publication is available from the British Library.

isbn 978 1 107 00177 0 Hardback

Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of URLs for external or third party internet websites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

PLOTINUS

The Enneads

The Enneads by Plotinus is a work which is central to the history of philosophy in late antiquity. This volume is the first complete edition of the Enneads in English for over seventy-five years, and also includes Porphyry’s Life of Plotinus . Led by Lloyd P. Gerson, a team of experts present up-to-date translations which are based on the best available text, the editio minor of Henry and Schwyzer and its corrections. The translations are consistent in their vocabulary, making the volume ideal for the study of Plotinus’ philosophical arguments. They also offer extensive annotation to assist the reader, together with cross-references and citations which will enable users more easily to navigate the texts. This monumental edition will be invaluable for scholars of Plotinus with or without ancient Greek, as well as for students of the Platonic tradition.

Lloyd P. Gerson is Professor of Philosophy at the University of Toronto. He is author of Ancient Epistemology (Cambridge, 2009 ) and editor of The Cambridge Companion to Plotinus (Cambridge, 1996 ) and The Cambridge History of Philosophy in Late Antiquity (Cambridge, 2015 ).

Contents

General Introduction to the Translations

page 1

Porphyry’s Arrangement of the Enneads

8

List of Textual Changes to Henry Schwyzer Editio Minor

10

On the Life of Plotinus and the Order of his Books by Porphyry of Tyre

17

Ennead One

39

1.1 (

53)

What Is the Living Being and What Is the Human Being?

41

1.2 (

19)

On Virtues

54

1.3 (

20)

On Dialectic

63

1.4 (

46)

On Happiness

69

1.5 On Whether Happiness Increases with Time

(

36)

86

(

1)

1.6 On Beauty

91

1.7 On the Primary Good and on the Other Goods

(

54)

104

1.8 On What Evils Are and Where They Come From 108

(

51)

1.9 On Exiting from the Body Fragment: Plotinus on Voluntary Death , by Elias

(

16)

124

126

Ennead Two

127

2.1 (

40)

On the Cosmos

129

2.2 On the Motion of Heaven

(

14)

140

2.3 On Whether the Stars Are Causes

(

52)

145

(

12)

2.4 On Matter

164

2.5 On ‘Potentially’ and ‘Actually’

(

25)

183

2.6 On Substance or On Quality

(

17)

190

2.7 On Complete Blending

(

37)

196

2.8 On Seeing, or On How It Is That Distant Things Appear Small

(

35)

202

2.9 (

33)

Against the Gnostics

206

Ennead Three

237

3.1

( 3)

On Fate

239

3.2

3 (47

and 48 )

On Providence

249

3.4

( 15)

On Our Allotted Daemon

283

v

Contents

3 .5 ( 50 )

On Love

291

3 .6 ( 26 )

On the Impassibility of Things without Bodies

305

3 .7 ( 45 )

On Eternity and Time

332

3 .8 ( 30 )

On Nature, Contemplation, and the One

354

3 .9 ( 13 )

Various Considerations

369

Ennead Four

375

4 .1 ( 21 )

On the Substantiality of the Soul 1

377

4 .2 ( 4)

On the Substantiality of the Soul 2

383

4 .3 5 (27 , 28 , and 29)

On Problems of the Soul 1 3

385

4 .6 ( 41 )

On Sense Perception and Memory

481

4 .7 ( 2)

On the Immortality of the Soul

487

4 .8 ( 6)

On the Descent of Souls into Bodies

510

4 .9 ( 8)

On Whether All Souls Are One

523

Ennead Five

529

5 .1 ( 10 ) 5 .2 ( 11 )

On the Three Primary Hypostases On the Generation and Order of the Things

531

Which Come after the First

548

5 .3 ( 49 )

On the Knowing Hypostasis and on That Which Is

Transcendent

552

5 .4 ( 7)

How That Which Is after the First Comes from

the First, and on the One

576

5 .5 ( 32 )

That the Intelligibles Are Not outside the Intellect,

and on the Good

581

5 .6 ( 24 )

On the Fact That That Which Transcends

Being Does Not Think and on What the Primary Thinking Is and What Is Secondary

598

5 .7 ( 18 )

On Whether or Not There Are Ideas of Individuals

605

5 .8 ( 31 )

On the Intelligible Beauty

609

5 .9 ( 5)

On Intellect, Ideas, and Being

625

Ennead Six

639

6 .1 3 (42 , 43 , and 44 )

On the Genera of Being 1 3

641

6 .4 5 (22 and 23 ) That Being, One and Identical, Is Simultaneously

 

Everywhere Whole 1 2

737

6 .6 ( 34 ) 6 .7 ( 38 )

On Numbers How the Multiplicity of the Ideas Came to Exist,

773

and on the Good

798

vi

6.8

6.9

(

(

39)

9)

Contents

On the Voluntary, and the One’s Wishing On the Good or the One

Greek Glossary of Key Terms English Glossary of Key Terms Bibliography of Principal Editions of Secondary Sources

vii

851

880

899

905

928

General Introduction to the Translations

the edition

This volume presents a new annotated translation of the Enneads of Plotinus ( 204 / 5 270 ce). We include as well the Life of Plotinus written by Porphyry of Tyre ( 223 / 4 c . 305 ce), who was also the first editor of the Enneads . Most of what we know about the life of Plotinus and the circumstances surrounding the composition of his treatises comes from Porphyry’s biography and so there is no need to repeat the details here. We follow Porphyry’s idiosyncratic arrangement of these treatises, an arrangement which does not correspond to the chronological order of their composition, as Porphyry himself tells us. A table comparing Porphyry’s ordering with the chronological ordering follows this introduction.

the translation

1 .

This translation into English of the Enneads of Plotinus is a ‘successor’ to two great monuments to scholarship, the translations by Stephen MacKenna ( 1917 1930 ) and A. H. Armstrong ( 1966 1988 ). 1 It is not a replacement for those works, which can still be consulted with consid- erable profit. In the case of MacKenna, he was impeded by the absence of a critical edition of the Greek text. That did not appear until the publication of the editio maior of the Enneads, Plotini Opera by Paul Henry and Hans-Rudolph Schwyzer ( 1951 1973 ). In the case of Armstrong, the first three volumes of his seven-volume work ( Enneads 1 3) appeared prior to the publication of the third volume of the editio minor of the Enneads by Henry and Schwyzer ( 1964 1982 ) containing several hundred corrections to the text of Enneads 1 5 in the first two

1 A number of excellent complete translations in European languages now exist. Special mention should be made of the Spanish translation of Igal ( 1982 1985), the French translation edited by Brisson and Pradeau ( 2002 2010), the German translation of Harder, continued by Beutler and Theiler ( 1956 1971), the Italian translation by Faggin (1992), and the modern Greek translation by Kalligas ( 1994 ), with Ennead 6 yet to appear.

1

Introduction to the Translations

volumes. Although textual problems hampered MacKenna much more than they did Armstrong, neither work has been rendered obsolete by the results of the critical work of Henry and Schwyzer, which, inciden- tally, continues to be advanced by a number of other scholars up to the present, for example, the late Je´ sus Igal and Paul Kalligas. The rationale for the present trans lation is twofold. First, there was the desire to produce a translatio n that would take account not only of the textual work that has been don e since Armstrong, but also of the enormous proliferation of scholar ship on Plotinus generally, many facets of which have had an inevitably anonymous influence on the present work. Second, it was thought beneficial to provide a transla- tion in one volume to facilitate the study of Plotinus, something which necessarily requires the comparis on of many disparate texts. There are very few of the so-called treatises in the Enneads that exhaust Plotinus’ treatment of a particula r question or topic. Consequently, one usually has to read several passages in different treatises together in order to get a more or less clear picture of Plotinus’ position. It is hoped that with one volume, and nu merous cross-re ferences, this will at least be made easier to do for the reader. In this regard, the English glossary of key terms, containing many references, should also provide assistance. The default text used in this translation is that of the editio minor of Henry and Schwyzer, conventionally designated as HS 2 . 2 Unless otherwise noted, this is the text that the authors of this work have translated. We note all deviations from that text in the notes, citing, for example, the reading of HS 4 over that of HS 2 . In a separate table, we list all the changes to the text we have followed, although space precludes a discussion of th e reasons for the changes. Those who can benefit from the side-by- side Greek text of Armstrong’s Loeb edition, can do the same with the editio minor ( OCT ) and our translation. The work of translating the Enneads (along with Porphyry’s Life of Plotinus , here included) has been an intensely collaborative effort. Although the work of translating individual Enneads was originally apportioned out to the individual members of the ‘team’, each draft was read and critically discussed with at least two other members. The final product is genuinely collaborative, with the inevitable proviso that

2 The editio maior is usually labelled HS 1 ; the editio minor HS 2 ; addenda to HS 1 labelled HS 3 ; textual addenda to HS 2 labelled HS 4 and the article by H. R. Schwyzer, ‘Corrigienda ad Plotini textum’, Museum Helveticum 44, 1 ( 1987), 191 210, is labelled HS 5 . Even though Henry’s name does not appear on the article (he died in 1984), he no doubt participated in the work that led up to this article and by common agreement he is listed as one of the authors.

2

Introduction to the Translations

each member of the team would like to reserve a minority dissenting position on this or that issue. Compromise was the price paid for achieving the desired result of publication. Strenuous efforts were made to attain a uniformity of vocabulary where appropriate, although the authors could only reflect with awe on the Septuagint as an unattain- able ideal of perfect unanimity that, as legend has it, was attained by the 70 translators of the Torah into Greek.

2 .

The present work, given its size limitation, could in no sense provide a commentary on the often desperately difficult thought of Plotinus, to say nothing of his inelegant, allusive, and sometimes even apparently ungrammatical Greek. The reader will certainly want to have recourse to what is now an abundance of basic exegetical commentary in many languages. For the English reader, the commentary of Kalligas ( Enneads 1 3, English translation, 2014 ; translations of 45 , and 6 forthcoming) sets a high standard of conciseness, erudition, and philosophical insight. Many individual treatises have by now had the benefit of book-length commentaries. 3 In the light of the challenges thrown up for the reader by a translation of the Enneads unadorned with any exegetical commentary, the authors have adopted a number of expedients. First, the notes contain brief explanations for words or passages otherwise quite unintelligible on their own. Second are the above-mentioned cross-references, which allow Plotinus to comment on himself, as it were. Third, is the extensive listing of fontes in the notes. These require a bit of explaining. The starting point for these is the appendix to the editio minor of Henry and Schwyzer, which includes hundreds of these. Henry and Schwyzer had no illusion that their table of fontes was complete. Inevitably, everyone who works intently on one or another treatise discovers additional ‘sources’. We have tried to be capacious in our listing of these sources because there is hardly a sentence of the Enneads that does not reflect Plotinus’ immersion in the ancient Greek philosophical tradition, including the ongoing involvement in that by his contempor- aries. Often, these fontes provide just by themselves a helpful commen- tary on what Plotinus is arguing since they enable us to understand exactly what he is arguing against. Nevertheless, the term fontes has a broad meaning, including everything from direct quotations from

3 See Richard Dufour (ed.), Plotinus: A Bibliography 1950 2000 (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2002 ), continued online up to the present at http ://rdufour.free.fr/BibPlotin/anglais/ Biblio.html.

3

Introduction to the Translations

Plato’s dialogues, to phrases or even illustrative examples of principles from, say, Aristotle or Alexander o f Aphrodisias, to Stoic texts that may well not have been even known to Plotinus but which nevertheless are our best source for an expression of the Stoic doctrine that Plotinus is addressing. Some of the fontes provided are, of course, disputable given the parameters for selection. In addition to those taken from the editio minor , many are gratefully mined from previous translations and commentaries. In the nature of the case, and given the unavailability to us of scores of texts Plotinus had at his disposal, any index fontium is bound to be incomplete. Finally, the cross-references should not be understood by the reader as indicat ing that the translators always believe that the passages cited express the identical doctrine. Indeed, there are occasions when the passages, at least on the surface, seem to say conflicting things. These refere nces are meant only to assist in the interpretative process. In the translations themselve s, the authors have adopted many orthographic, grammatical, and stylistic devices intended to facilitate comprehension. Paragraphs have been introduced to divide the text into more or less logical units. Lengthy periodic sentences have been shortened for the sake of clarity along with the liberal use of punctua- tion. When the reference of a pronoun is grammatically and semanti- cally certain, the proper name has been introduced. For example, Plotinus often says ‘he says’ followed by a direct quotation from a Platonic dialogue. This appears as ‘ Plato says’. When the reference is not certain but probable, the identification is made in a footnote. Plotinus has a number of grammatica l idiosyncracies that indicate that he is introducing a new point or a new argument or making a determinatio after a dialectical discussion. For example, he uses the Greek word which is normally translated as ‘or’ to introduce his answer to a question he himself raises or in reply to an argument of one of his opponents that he has just sketched. A sort of gloss on this ’

feature of the text would be to render it as ‘or is it not the case that

But apart from the facts that Plotin us is not expressing a rhetorical question, and that translating on e Greek letter with seven words seems a bit much, there is a consis tent pattern of use by Plotinus of this word to indicate that what follows is his own position. We render the word ‘in fact’ and set it off in a new paragraph to make the philosophical elements of the text as clear as possible. There are other terms, including τονυν (‘so’), ον (‘then’), γρ (‘for’), that serve a similar demarca tional purpose. A much more delicate issue is the use of capitalizations. Conventionally, the three primary hypostases of Plotinus’ system are referred to in English as ‘One’ (or ‘Good’), ‘Intellect’, and ‘Soul’. When

4

Introduction to the Translations

these words are used other than for the three primary hypostases, they appear in lower case. Unfortunately, it is not always clear whether, for example, Plotinus in a given passage is referring to Intellect or to intellect, that is, to an individual intellect. The same problem turns up for Soul or soul. Here, interpretation is inevitable, but we have tended to default to lower case, when the reference is not at least highly probable or when the reference is generic. In addition, capitalization has been used for the Demiurge of Plato’s Timaeus , given that this principle is invested by Plato and Plotinus with what we might term personal attributes. Plotinus uses the term θες rather freely to refer to one or another of the primary hypostases. Although the absolute primacy of the first hypostasis is undisputable, to capitalize ‘god’ in this case would be misleading if that leads one to suppose that Plotinus is arguing for anything like a form of monotheism. On the other hand, he does sometimes invest the first principle of all with person al attributes in which case personal pronouns are used. Plotinus’ ontological vocabulary cannot be mapped onto ordinary English vocabulary one-to-on e. The distinctions between εναι, τὸ ὄν, τὰ ὄντα, and οσα cannot be straightforwardly rendered into English by different terms that at the same time preserve the etymological connections among these terms. The importance of rendering the Greek in a perspicuous manner is heightened by the fact that Plotinus’ metaphysics is hierar chical and the higher, intelligible world is always treated as superior to and explanatory of the lower sensible world. The strategy we have adopted is to capitalize or put in lower case the identical term depending on whether it is used of the intelligible world or sensible world. Thus, οσα becomes ‘Substance’ or ‘Substantiality’ when referring to the intelligible world and ‘substance’ or ‘substantiality’ when referring to the sensible world. The terms τὸ ὄν ( τὰ ὄντα ) are rendered ‘Being’ (‘Beings’) or ‘being’ (‘beings’) based on the same prin ciple. An analogous procedure is followed for εναι when used as a noun: ‘Existence’ or ‘existence’; the finite verb, however, is normally ‘exist(s)’. A somewhat delicate translation issue arises for the terms τατν and μοιον . In most English translations, the former term is rendered ‘same’ and the latter ‘like’. There are several reasons for resisting these transla- tions. First, for Plato and for Plotinus τατν is ontologically prior to μοιον as is evident from the fact that the former, not the latter, is one of the μγιστα γνη (‘greatest genera’). Stated otherwise, if things are μοιον that is because there is something τατν prior to it. To render τατν as ‘same’ raises a question for a Platonist that cannot be answered, namely, what explains the fact that two (or more) things are the same? Second, to

5

Introduction to the Translations

render μοιον as ‘like’ or ‘similar’ undermines the very foundation of Platonism. This is so because, in English at any rate, to say that one thing is ‘like’ another or ‘similar’ to another is, typically, to make a claim that is irreducibly subjective. One may find one thing like or similar to another, whereas someone else does not. These claims are beyond objective adjudication; there is no way to determine who is right. Hence, for the Platonist, claims of likeness or similarity provide no reason for positing Forms. Such claims do not require objective or scientific explanation, whereas the whole point, one might say, of the Platonic project is that there are certain phenomenal facts that can only be explained by a theory of Forms, a theory of separate self-identical entities. Hence, the decision to translate τατν as ‘identical’ and μοιον as ‘same’. The nouns, μοιτης and μοωμα are, however, rendered ‘likeness’ which can have the connotation of ‘derived sameness’ as in ‘this work of art was intended as a likeness of that landscape’. In addi- tion, the important term μοωσις is rendered as ‘assimilation’ indicative of a process of attempting to achieve a particular sort of sameness with regard to a model or paradigm. There is on a number of occasions some awkwardness arising from this decision. For in English, we naturally say things like ‘they followed the same rule that we did’ or ‘we arrived at the same time’ or ‘one and the same principle is found both here and there’ or ‘the same account applies to both’ when Plotinus employs the term τατν in all these cases. The justification for tolerating the awkwardness is, in addition to the above points, that for Plotinus τατν and μοιον are quasi-technical terms, meaning that they are occasionally used in a non-technical or colloquial way. But it was thought misleading to revert to the English colloquial translations in the latter cases, a practice that would always leave the reader wondering whether or how Platonic principles would be applicable in the given instance. Another peculiarity of the present translation is that the term κε, which is the ordinary Greek word for ‘there’ almost always means for Plotinus ‘the intelligible (or non-sensible) world’, and is so translated. There are a very few places where it does in fact just mean ‘there’ in contrast to ‘here’, for example, in a discussion of spatial concepts. And occasionally it refers not to the intelligible world but to the sensible heaven or heavenly things as opposed to terrestrial things, the former including the planets and the heavenly spheres. The Greek word λγος has a wide semantic range. Apart from its use for any unit of intelligible discourse, the term also has a specific technical meaning for Plotinus. It refers to the expression or mani- festation of a higher principle at a lower level. Thus, for example, each hypostasis is a λγος of the one above and an enmattered form in the

6

Introduction to the Translations

sensible world is a λγος of the Form in the soul of the cosmos which is itself a λγος of the Form in Intellect. The term is most frequently translated into English as ‘rational principle’. But all principles are rational for Plotinus and this translation does not convey the impor- tant feature of the λγος that it is derived from something higher in the hierarchy. In order to convey this essential feature of the technical term, we have translated λγος as ‘expressed principle’. For these and many other translation choices, the glossary should be consulted.

7

Porphyry’s Arrangement of the Enneads

List of Enneads as Arranged by Porphyry and the Corresponding Chronological Order

Enn.

Chron. Enn.

Chron. Enn. Chron.

1.1

53

2.1

40

3.

1

3

1.2

19

2.2

14

3.

2

47

1.3 2.3

20

52

3.

3

48

1.4 46

2.4

12

3.

4

15

1.5 36

2.5

25

3.

5

50

1.61

2.6

17

3.

6

26

1.7

54

2.7

37

3.

7

45

1.8

51

2.8

35

3.

8

30

1.9

16

2.9

33

3.

9

13

4.1

21

5.1

10

6.

1

42

4.24

5.2

11

6.

2

43

4.3

27

5.3

49

6.

3

44

4.4

28

5.47

6.

4

22

4.5 29

5.5

32

6.

5

23

4.6 41

5.6

24

6.

6

34

4.72

5.7

18

6.

7

38

4.86

5.8

31

6.

8

39

4.98

5.95

6.

9

9

Enneads in Chronological Order and the Corresponding Order of Porphyry

Chron. Enn.

Chron. Enn. Chron. Enn.

1 1

.6

19

1.2

37

2.7

2 4

.7

20

1.3

38

6.7

3 3

.1

21

4.1

39

2.1

4 4

.2

22

6.4

40

2.1

5 5

.9

23

6.5

41

4.6

6 4

.8

24

5.6

42

6.1

7 5

.4

25

2.5

43

6.2

8 4

.9

26

3.6

44

6.3

8

Porphyry’s Arrangement of the Enneads

Chron. Enn.

Chron. Enn. Chron. Enn.

9

6.

9

27

4

.3

45

3

.7

10

5.

1

28

4

.4

46

1

.4

11

5.

2

29

4

.5

47

3

.2

12

2.

4

30

3

.8

48

3

.3

13

3.

9

31

5

.8

49

5

.3

14

2.

2

32

5

.5

50

3

.5

15

3.

4

33

2

.9

51

1

.8

16

1.

9

34

6

.6

52

2

.3

17

2.

6

35

2

.8

53

1

.1

18

5.

7

36

1

.5

54

1

.7

9

List of Textual Changes to Henry-Schwyzer Editio Minor

1 . 4. 2 . 35 – Reading προσλαμβνετε with Armstrong.

1 . 4. 4 . 24 – Reading εwith HS 4 . 1 . 4. 6 . 13 – Correcting the ατof HS 2 to ατ. 1 . 4. 8 . 5 – Reading σται < κα> ν τῷ ἀλγεν , λλτατο[ καὶ ἐν τ] νδον γγγος οον with HS 4 . 1 . 5. 2 . 7 – Eliminating the quotation marks in HS 2 . 1 . 5. 7 . 25 – Restoring ταἰῶνα from HS 1 . 1 . 6. 3 . 27 – Reading λον with Kalligas. 1 . 6. 7 . 14 – Reading ν < οκ > κπλαγεη with HS 4 . 1 . 8. 5 . 14 – Following the punctuation of HS 1 with a full stop before τ. 1 . 8. 7 . 7 – Reading κ θεοτοwith Creuzer. 1 . 8. 9 . 21 – Reading τοτου with Dodds. 1 . 8. 10 . 15 – Reading instead of ν . 2 . 1. 1 . 15 – Reading μηδτι with HS 4 . 2 . 1. 1 . 32 – Reading κατwith Igal and HS 5 .

– Reading ρστοις κειμνην δυνμει θαυμαστκινουμνην with

HS 4 . 2 . 1. 5 . 12 – Correcting the typographical error σε in HS 2 to τε . 2 . 1. 5 . 23 – Reading συλλαμβανομνη with HS 4 . 2 . 1. 7 . 7 – Reading μετχειν δὲ ὕδατος πρς τ<τ> μαχμηρν χειν τε κα. 2 . 1. 7 . 19 – Reading πυρτητα with HS 3 . 2 . 1. 7 . 24 – Reading οδετρον with HS 3 . 2 . 2. 1 . 6 – Reading with Harder. 2 . 2. 1 . 11 – Reading λλοθι κατwith HS 4 . Also, following HS 4 in changing the question mark after περιλαμβνειν to a raised dot. 2 . 2. 1 . 44 – Reading πσά ἐστιν , ατς πντη φεται with HS 4 . 2 . 2. 2 . 19 – Reading λεπτν < ν > καwith HS 5 . 2 . 2. 3 . 11 – Retaining the εμνον κινοτο of the mss. 2 . 3. 5 . 17 – Reading τwith Beutler-Theiler. 2 . 3. 6 . 5 – Reading πρα with Igal and HS 4 . 2 . 3. 6 . 13 – Reading ναμονς for ναφορς with HS 4 . 2 . 3. 7 . 16 – Following the punctuation of HS 4 . 2 . 3. 12 . 31 – Reading τῷ ἀναλγof HS 4 .

2

. 1. 4 . 14

10

Textual Changes to Editio Minor

2 .3 . 13 . 10 – Reading τδὲ ὁλ< τ> πντα τε μρη ντα ατο[ τπντα ] with the corrections of HS 4 . 2 .3 . 14 . 13 – Reading κα< > τι with HS 4 . 2 .3 . 14 . 26 – Reading διαπραξμενον , < τερον δ> ταρων with HS 4 . 2 .3 . 17 . 18 – Deleting χερω with Mu¨ ller. 2 .3 . 18 . 3 – Following the punctuation of HS 5 . 2 .4 . 1 .12 – Reading ατεν with HS 4 . 2 .4 . 5 .34 – Reading λη καθὸ ἕτερον with HS 4 . 2 .4 . 12 . 1 – Following the punctuation of HS 4 . 2 .4 . 12 . 36 – Reading εδοποισασα following ms Q. 2 .4 . 14 . 28 – Reading τwith HS 5 . 2 .4 . 15 . 5 – Deleting οδτξις after τεταγμνον with HS 5 . 2 .4 . 15 . 26 – Reading postpositive ς with HS 3 . 2 .4 . 16 . 8 – Retaining οκ with HS 4 . 2 .4 . 16 . 14 – Reading ρρενος <φεται > [ κα] οκ πλλυται with O’Brien 1999 : 70 . 1 2 .4 . 16 . 27 – Reading τερον ν, πρς τκακ, τοῦ ὄντος with Igal and HS 4 . 2 .5 . 1 .5 – Reading στιν νεργείᾳ […] καὶ ἐνργεια with HS 4 . 2 .5 . 1 .9 – Reading οτω τin line 9 with Igal and HS 4 . 2 .5 . 2 .24 – Reading κωλει κατ᾽ ἄλλον with HS 4 . 2 .6 . 1 .7 – Deleting οσα . 2 .6 . 1 .8 – Inserting before οσα with Kalligas and HS 5 . 2 .6 . 1 .35 – Reading πυρτητα for the πυρτης of the mss. 2 .7 . 1 .46 – Adding κοιτο <τ> κατwith Theiler followed by HS 4 . 2 .7 . 2 .5 – Reading γενομνοις with Beutler-Theiler. 2 .7 . 2 .16 – Reading ντος with Armstrong and Ficino. 2 .7 . 2 .35 – Eliminating the question mark. 2 .8 . 1 .6 – Inserting καwith Theiler. 2 .8 . 1 .37 – Reading τοδεδους <το> καθ᾽ ἕκαστον with Theiler and HS 3 and ἡ ὄψις with Theiler and HS 3 but retaining τοκαθ᾽ ἕκαστον of HS 2 . 2 .9 . 4 .10 – Following the punctuation in HS 4 , but retaining the question mark after δ. 2 .9 . 5 .15 – Reading ψυχῇ ἐφιεμνης with HS 4 . 2 .9 . 6 .54 – Following the punctuation of HS 4 . 2 .9 . 6 .55 – Reading γνωσθσεται τδ᾽ ὕστερον with HS 4 . 2 .9 . 6 .56 – Reading ν γε ος with HS 4 . 2 .9 . 9 .19 – Reading κατ᾽ ἀξαν with HS 4 . 2 .9 . 9 .35 – Reading νδεικνμενον . 2 .9 . 9 .60 – Reading a full-stop instead of a question mark.

1 Denis O’Brien, ‘La matie` re chez Plotin: son origine, sa nature’, Phronesis 44 (1999): 45 71.

11

Textual Changes to Editio Minor

2 . 9. 9 . 60 ff. – Reading with HS 4 Οον εἰ ἐν πλεστοις ριθμεν οκ εδσιν ριθμεν οκ εδς πχεων χλιων εναι κοοι, < μνον δφαντζοιτο ς τχλια ριθμς μγας >, τί ἄν χιλιπηχυς εναι νομζοι, τος < δ> λλους πενταπχες ; [ εναι κοοι μνον δφαντζοιτο ς τχλια ριθμς μγας ]. 2 . 9. 9 . 71 – Reading ατοwith Beutler-Theiler and Dufour. 2 . 9. 9 . 77 – Deleting πντα with HS 4 . 2 . 9. 9 . 80 – Reading ογρ ᾗ ἐπαγγλοιτο χει , λγει with Kirchhoff and HS 4 . 2 . 9. 10 . 32 – Reading ατοῦ ἕλκουσιν πwith Theiler and HS 4 . 2 . 9. 12 . 6 – Inserting καbefore λθντες with HS 3 . 2 . 9. 12 . 11 – Reading κακοσμοεκενου λαβεν ννοιαν [ κσμου κενου ] with HS 3 . 2 . 9. 12 . 38 – Reading τκακν with Heigl and Beutler-Theiler. 2 . 9. 14 . 4 – Reading λγουσιν ς with HS 5 . 2 . 9. 14 . 8 – Following the interrogative punctuation of HS 5 . 2 . 9. 15 . 15 – Deleting τε τσωφρονεν with HS 4 . 2 . 9. 16 . 10 – Deleting τι with HS 3 . 2 . 9. 17 . 7 – Reading καwith Kirchhoff. 2 . 9. 17 . 9 – Reading τγενμενον τῷ ἀμερετwith Kirchhoff, Theiler, and Armstrong. 2 . 9. 17 . 17 – Deleting χειν as suggested by HS 5 . 2 . 9. 17 . 19 – Reading τοσοτον with HS 5 . 2 . 9. 17 . 53 – Reading προσιν τι with HS 3 . 3 . 1. 6 . 4 5 – Reading τος γειναμνοις with HS 4 . 3 . 2. 2 . 27 – Reading γνεσιν λλοις with HS 3 and Harder. 3 . 2. 4 . 38 – Reading παρτου with HS 3 . 3 . 2. 7 . 4 – Reading ἰέναι < τι > with HS 3 . 3 . 2. 8 . 31 – Reading παλαστρας with Igal and HS 5 . 3 . 2. 16 . 19 – Reading ἐὰν ζωπαρwith HS 3 which follows MacKenna. 3 . 2. 17 . 55 – Reading τοποιητο< το> παντς ποιοντος κυρους according to the conjecture of Creuzer. 3 . 2. 18 . 19 – Reading ε<οκ > τοπος with HS 3 . 3 . 3. 3 . 11 – Reading τοτου with Heintz and Kalligas. 3 . 3. 5 . 8 – Reading πληγντος with HS 5 . 3 . 3. 5 . 24 – Reading τμτοιατα with HS 5 following Heintz and Harder. 3 . 3. 6 . 5 – Reading ντος τι < > where, as HS 3 notes, following Creuzer, τι (= δλον τι ). 3 . 3. 6 . 15 – Reading σα < τε > δδωσιν ες τὸ ἐπικεμενον παρατοwith HS 3 .

12

Textual Changes to Editio Minor

3 .4 . 6 .28 – Reading κα[ τοιοτ] θεκαδαμονwith HS 4 following Theiler. 3 .4 . 6 .29 – Reading αττοιοτχρσεται with HS 4 . 3 .4 . 6 .44 – Retaining τν with HS 1 and Guyot.

3 .5 . 1 .55 – Reading καλν [ κα] < μ> διwith HS 4 following Ficino’s original emendation. 3 .5 . 3 .4 – Restoring the words καζσα which are bracketed in HS 2 . 3 .5 . 7 .24 – Reading μχανον with Kirchhoff and HS 4 . 3 .5 . 9 .20 – Reading ατοwith HS 4 . 3 .5 . 9 .53 – Reading πρς ατ. 3 .6 . 3 .25 – Reading λλοιομεν with Theiler, Fleet, Kalligas, and Laurent. 3 .6 . 7 .1 – Reading κατwith Volkmann and Kalligas. 3 .6 . 12 . 5 – Reading ζητν with Armstrong and Fleet. 3 .6 . 18 . 23 – Reading with Theiler, Armstrong, Fleet, and Kalligas. 3 .7 . 2 .7 – Reading τι with HS 4 and ποτερουον (‘than either of the two’) according to a suggestion of Kalligas. 3 .7 . 3 .12 – Reading ες ν, < στε> μοwith HS 4 . 3 .7 . 4 .2 – Reading λλ᾽ ἐν κενwith Perna and Kalligas. 3 .7 . 8 .9 – Reading καατη <περιφροιτο ν ες τατ>, επερ τν περιφορν λγοι , ν χρν. τιν[ καατη περιφροιτο ν ες τατ], οκ with HS 4 following a suggestion of Igal. 3 .7 . 12 . 40 – Reading οκου̑ν ν , να μετρafter a suggestion by Guyot. 3 .7 . 13 . 1 – Reading ατwith HS 4 following Kirchhoff. 3 .7 . 13 . 50 – Reading καταθετον ατν with HS 4 . 3 .8 . 1 .16 – Deleting καwith Theiler. 3 .8 . 1 .24 – Reading καπω̑ς with Kirchhoff. 3 .8 . 4 .5 – Reading μν σιωπσης with HS 4 .

– Reading κα[ οον συναισθσει ] τσυυνσει τατκα<οον >

3

συναισθσει with HS 4 . 3 .8 . 5 .10 – Deleting τλογιστικν with HS 4 , following Kirchhoff. 3 .8 . 5 .12 – Reading μεταλαμβνον <πρεισι > with HS 4 . 3 .8 . 9 .24 – Reading ατο. τwith HS 4 . 3 .8 . 9 .31 – Reading κκε[ να] with Armstrong. 4 .1 . 1 .15 – Deleting κακτω with Bre´ hier, and adopting οσης, with the majority of mss. 4 .1 . 1 .17 – Reading ρᾶ ὡς with Igal. 4 .3 . 3 .12 13 – The line εσγρ ν μφοτραις πασι is restored to ll. 17 18 from ll. 13 14 where HS 2 place it. 4 .3 . 4 .20 – Reading γκους , as proposed by HS 2 in the apparatus. 4 .3 . 5 .16 – Retaining the words καττατof the mss. 4 .3 . 10 . 5 – Reading ετα with the mss and adding <τ> before πρτα.

.8 . 4 .19

13

Textual Changes to Editio Minor

4 . 3. 13 . 26 – Reading ατος < τος> with HS 4 following Kirchhoff. 4 . 3. 22 . 9 – Restoring the κα, the deletion of which by Vitringa is accepted by HS 2 . 4 . 3. 26 . 12 – Reading ατν with HS 4 . 4 . 4. 5 . 18 – Following HS 5 correcting the text to ποιησμεναι ρα γνωρζοιεν thus changing a question into an assertion. 4 . 4. 7 . 8 – Reading ν with Theiler. 4 . 4. 14 . 1 – Reading [ τ] σματα with HS 4 . 4 . 4. 15 . 3 – Reading < ν> τῇ ὑποστσει with HS 4 on a suggestion of Igal. 4 . 4. 17 . 22 – Retaining σθενς with Kirchhoff. 4 . 4. 24 . 9 – Correcting the typographical error, replacing ποθεν with παθεν . 4 . 4. 25 . 7 – Correcting the typographical error, replacing ασθσει with ασθσεις . 4 . 4. 28 . 32 – Accepting κρσεις, the reading of the mss.

4 . 4. 28 . 44 – Replacing κν with HS 4 . 4 . 4. 35 . 18 – Reading πτοῦ ἐν λγοις with Igal and HS 4 and the mss. 4 . 4. 36 . 7 – Reading δwith Kirchhoff. 4 . 4. 43 . 23 – Reading τν πτην with Kirchhoff. 4 . 5. 2 . 2 – Preserving φς with the mss. 4 . 5. 2 . 25 – Reading < δια >δδομενον with Igal and HS 5 . 4 . 5. 7 . 35 – Reinserting φς with HS 4 . 4 . 5. 8 . 20 – Reading οδτν σφραγδα with ms R.

4 . 5. 8 . 29

4 . 6. 2 . 23 – Reading νος with Theiler and Harder. 4 . 6. 3 . 26 – Reading μνμονας with Creuzer and HS 5 . 4 . 7. 2 . 15 – Reading < ν> οκ στιν with Igal and HS 3 . 4 . 7. 8 . 5 .42 – Following Harder and HS 4 in deleting the clause that follows these words: οον ζου οτσμα τν ψυχν γεννσει

. 4 . 7. 13 . 17 – Reading νεργείᾳ τομνοντος with Harder. 4 . 8. 4 . 36 – Reading ατwith HS 3 , following Igal. 4 .