These are the edition's working notes, published as they were written. They record, work by work, where Migne's plate is defective or the reading uncertain: the printed form, what the English does with it, and why. They are not a groomed apparatus. Where a note argues with itself, withdraws an earlier decision, or leaves a question open, that is the record of how the reading was actually reached, and it is left standing — a conjecture that is visible can be checked, and one that has been tidied away cannot.
The English never silently repairs the page. A construable but wrong reading is rendered literally and the conjecture is recorded here, never applied to the text. How the English is produced and checked →
Garbled or corrupt printed readings rendered literally per the translation register, logged here with column, printed reading, and note. The Hebrew dropped by the Corpus Corporum transcription (Migne sets Hebrew type followed by a Latin transliteration; the Hebrew fell out, leaving a stray space or doubled comma) was RECOVERED from the plates (Gallica f126–f127, 2026-07-17) and re-inserted into both twins; provenance in data/hebrew-patches/11059.json, method in hebrew-recovery.md.
- col 0091A — In Hebraeo sic habetur: Biflagoth ruben gotholib helchiche lem [Hebrew] ; id est... Hebrew RECOVERED (f126): בפלגות ראובן גדלים חקקי־לב = Judg. 5:15b, verified against MT + Migne's own transliteration. Unpointed; scan leaves ל/ר and ה/ח indistinct, read per MT.
- col 0091D — In Hebraeo habetur: Romae Zachae quod interpretatur... NOT a lacuna: the plate (f126) carries no Hebrew type here — the transliteration is complete. Earlier "dropped Hebrew" note withdrawn. (Hugh's own point: Romae transliterates a Hebrew word for "height," not the place-name Ramah — "in which the translation erred.")
- col 0092D — printed quando Israel habitavit in Hesebon, et vinculis ejus (lemma of Judg. 11:26). Migne prints vinculis ("bonds") where the Vulgate has viculis ("its villages / hamlets"); rendered literally as "in its bonds."
- col 0094B — In Hebraeo sic habetur: Sogal ghereth, [Hebrew], id est tibiam super femur. Hebrew RECOVERED (f127): עַל־יָרֵךְ = Judg. 15:8 (ʿal-yārēk, "upon the thigh"). Pointed and legible; matches MT. (Was the doubled-comma lacuna.)
- col 0094C — In Hebraeo sic habetur: In maxilla asini homor hemor, [Hebrew] in maxilla asini percussi mille viros. Hebrew RECOVERED (f127): הַחֲמֹר חֲמוֹר = Judg. 15:16, Migne's doublet on the root ḥ-m-r (ass/heap), glossed cumulum de cumulis, "a heap of heaps." Pointed and legible.
- col 0096B — printed quod facore voluerunt (JUD. XX comment). Misprint for facere; rendered "what they wished to do."
Variant readings in square brackets are editorial, not corruption, and are kept verbatim/untranslated per the register: [Merome ] (col 0091C, for Romae), [Meros seu Merotz] (col 0091D, for Meroth), [Ozri ] (col 0092B, for Ezri), [ardorem] (col 0094C, for odorem).
Column anchors reproduced exactly as printed; the print skips col 0095D (text runs 0095C → 0096A).
<!-- corpus-polarity-sweep 2026-07-28 --> ## Corpus polarity sweep — 2026-07-28
Blind Opus read of the Latin/English pair for sense-reversing defects (one word or one letter asserting the opposite of what the context requires). 1 site(s). Migne's defects are recorded here and rendered literally in the English; our own errors were fixed in place. Full context: data/sweeps/corpus-polarity/REPORT.md.
0087C — sense-reversing-letter (migne, medium confidence)
Printed: Intelligitur ergo, quod filii Benjamin, quorum possessio tribui Juda cuncta erat, et Hierusalem contingebat: postquam filii Juda civitatem ceperant atque vastaverant, in eadem habitare coeperunt
Conjecture: juncta erat (c for j): "quorum possessio tribui Juda juncta erat, et Hierusalem contingebat" — "whose possession was joined to the tribe of Judah and touched Jerusalem." juncta … contingebat is the natural pair, and the English's "lay wholly next to" is a silent repair that quietly supplies the "next to" the printed cuncta does not contain.
As printed, cuncta erat asserts that Benjamin's possession belonged entirely to the tribe of Judah. That is the opposite of what the whole sentence is doing, which is explaining why BENJAMIN, not Judah, came to occupy Jerusalem: "filii Benjamin ... in eadem habitare coeperunt, ipsumque Jebusaeum habitatorem loci a filiis Juda subactum secum habitare passi sunt." The neighbouring clause "et Hierusalem contingebat" ("and touched Jerusalem") is a statement of adjacency and requires a possession Benjamin actually holds; if that possession were wholly Judah's there would be nothing of Benjamin's to touch Jerusalem, and the entire explanation of Benjamin's presence in the city collapses.