Editor’s Note on References, Editions, and Translations

In: The Platonizing Sethian Background of Plotinus’s Mysticism
Free access

Editor’s Note on References, Editions, and Translations

The style guide used by the editorial team for this volume was the SBL Handbook of Style (2014), although some of Dr. Mazur’s preferences remain unchanged: for instance, primary sources are almost never abbreviated, but given with full Latin title. A list of the abbreviations that are used throughout are found below.

Only those primary sources which are quoted in the text are listed in the bibliography. Primary sources are listed in the bibliography by modern editor or translator, with the exception of Plotinus himself (under “Plotinus”). Greek sources appear to have been translated by Dr. Mazur, presumably with reference to available translations.

Dr. Mazur’s treatment of the text of Plotinus merits special mention. He quoted the Greek text of Plotinus according to the editio maior of Henry and Schwyzer (H-S1), while adapting the translations of Armstrong in the Loeb Classical Library. However, Armstrong’s Greek text is based upon the editio minor (H-S2), not the editio maior (H-S1), and includes other emendations not found in H-S1. In cases where the text of Armstrong does not agree with that of H-S1, Dr. Mazur has usually (but not always) opted for Armstrong. Accordingly, where the two editions differ, the team has indicated the discrepancy by putting the reading rejected by Mazur in brackets. Thus, “τῇ αἰσθήσει [H-S1: διαθέσει]” (at VI.9[9].7.17–21) means that here, Armstrong’s text does not agree with H-S1, and Mazur has preferred Armstrong’s αἰσθήσει to H-S1’s διαθέσει. Conversely, “Εἰ [Armstrong, LCL: Ἔτι]” (at V.8[31].11.1–19) means that here, Armstrong’s text does not agree with H-S1, and Mazur has preferred H-S1’s Εἰ to Armstrong’s Ἔτι.

Coptic sources are with reference to the editions published in the Coptic Gnostic Library (CGL) published by Brill (Robinson 2000), except for the ‘Platonizing’ Sethian texts, where Dr. Mazur preferred the editions of the Bibliothèque Copte de Nag Hammadi (BCNH) published by Les Presses de l’Université Laval and Peeters (Barry, Funk, Poirier, and Turner 2000; Funk, Poirier, and Turner 2000; Funk, Poirier, and Scopello 2004), at times with further reference to the oeuvre of Turner, as noted. Word division of the Coptic text follows the rules outlined in Till 1941. Translations of Coptic sources are usually those found in CGL, unaltered or slightly modified, as noted; the ‘Platonizing’ Sethian texts appear to be translated by Mazur himself. Sigla in the treatment of the Coptic text follow the Leiden Conventions, with the exception that the ellipse … is used to mark skipped text, while […] marks a lacuna of three letters or more (rather than three dots indicating a lacuna of three letters).