The following text makes no claim to be a critical edition. Its main purpose is to show which solutions I have opted for in controversial cases, and to indicate in the apparatus the alternatives others have suggested. I do not, however, mention suggestions that have been superseded by more accurate readings of the papyrus. It has to be noted also that, because of the complex editorial situation and the constant exchange of information among scholars in informal ways, in some cases it is difficult to identify the ultimate origin of a supplement or emendation.
I was already about to submit the manuscript for publication when Richard Janko's ‘interim text’ was published (Janko (2002)). Without any doubt, it is the most important advance since 1982 when the first near-complete provisional transcript was published, and it should form the textual basis for the study of the papyrus until Prof. Tsantsanoglou's long-awaited edition becomes available. I have revised the following text taking into account Janko's new suggestions regarding both supplements and translation. It turns out that in some cases we are proposing the same new supplements, independently of each other.
The primary sources for the individual columns are as follows:
Coll. 1–7: Tsantsanoglou (1997) (I do not indicate the ZPE readings in the apparatus for they are unhelpful in view of Tsantsanoglou's new readings)
Col. 12: Tsantsanoglou ap. Brisson (1997)
Col. 20: Tsantsanoglou ap. Obbink (1997)
Coll. 17, 22, and 25: Tsantsanoglou's readings displayed at the exhibition of the Derveni papyrus in the Archaeological Museum of Thessaloniki (Apr.–Aug. 1998). I reinstate the consonant assimilations of the papyrus, however.