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 in Migne (PL 176), rendered literally per the register rule rather than emended. Column locations follow Migne's plates.
| Column | Printed reading | Note |
|---|---|---|
| capitula (chunk 0000, before col 0997B) | De fiac, et ejus comitibus (CAP. XVI title) | fiac is corrupt for fide ("On faith"); cf. the chapter itself at 1004A ("CAP. XVI. De fide"). Rendered as the untranslated nonce word fiac in italic, following the "render literally, do not emend" rule. |
| ~0998 (chunk 0000, CAP. II head) | …virtutum cum virtutibus, viliorum cum vitiis… | viliorum is corrupt for vitiorum ("of vices"); cf. the parallel capitula line (0000, before 0997B) which reads vitiorum correctly. viliorum is itself a real word (gen. pl. of vilior, "baser"), so rendered literally as "of baser things with vices." Also present verbatim in the chunk frontmatter heads field. |
| 0998 (chunk 0000, CAP. I) | Fortitudo retinet et reborat | reborat is a non-word, corrupt for roborat ("strengthens"); rendered by evident sense ("strengthens"). |
| 1002B (chunk 0001, Blandishments def.) | cum quadam dulcedine vitioserum delectaminum | vitioserum is corrupt for vitiosorum ("of vicious"); rendered by evident sense ("of vicious delights"). |
| 1002D (chunk 0001, Memory def.) | imaginaria quaedam repraesentatio praeteritorun | praeteritorun is corrupt for praeteritorum ("of past things"); rendered by evident sense ("of past things"). |
<!-- 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.
0997C — dropped-word (ours, high confidence)
Printed: Et quidem superbia fructus carnis radix est, fructus spiritus humilitas. Quae diversitas inspecta radicum, fructum earum moderabiliter quaerentis appetitum ostendit.
Conjecture: The elliptical Latin is 'fructus spiritus humilitas [radix est]' — humility is the ROOT of the fruit of the spirit. The English drops the carried-over 'radix est' and thereby makes humility the fruit rather than the root, i.e. the opposite term of the root/fruit pair the sentence is built on. Read: 'humility the root of the fruit of the spirit.'
The immediately following sentence in both texts is plural: 'Quae diversitas inspecta RADICUM' / 'once the ROOTS are inspected' — two roots, but the English has named only one. Confirmed by the frame of the whole work: the Prologue promises 'Duas itaque arbusculas ... ex quarum RADICE fructuum proventus pateat' (two little trees, from whose root the yield of the fruits may lie open), and CAP. I opens 'Cunctarum ... virtutum fundamentum est humilitas' / 'the foundation of all the virtues ... is humility' — humility is the root of the spiritual tree, not its fruit. CAP. II likewise speaks of 'radix superbiae' set against 'sanctae humilitatis uberi dulcedine', keeping humility on the root side of the antithesis.