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 →
Created 2026-07-28 by the PL 196 polarity sweep. This work had no cruces file before: it was translated in an earlier batch and nothing was logged for it.
Attribution — part of the TEXT, not the badge
Only the prologue is Richard of St Victor's; the body is Walter of St Victor's, and Migne's byline says Richard. Unlike a landing-page badge, a byline naming the wrong author is part of the edition. Carried forward from the 2026-07-28 badge audit; not yet fixed.
1014B — veritatem for unitatem in the Ephesians lemma (HIGH confidence)
Migne prints the lemma of Eph. 4:3 as:
Solliciti estote servare veritatem spiritus in vinculo pacis [n: (Ephes. IV)]
Eph. 4:3 reads unitatem spiritus, and the plate contradicts itself on both sides of the lemma:
- Immediately before, introducing the quotation: Ad cujus corporis unitatem nos invitat Apostolus, dicens:
- Immediately after, glossing the quoted word six times: __Unitatem__ vocat spiritus, illam unitatem quam facit spiritus in corpore Christi, quod est Ecclesia, cujus unitatis vinculum est pax ad quam unitatem nos invitat … Ideo unitatem spiritus servare debemus.
So the commentary glosses a word its own lemma does not contain. This is the same failure mode as vanitatem for unitatem at 11063/0376D and the wider PL 196 sense-inversion class (see the sweep report at data/sweeps/pl196-polarity/REPORT.md).
Rendered literally per Pattern 7 — the English reads "keep the truth of the spirit in the bond of peace," and then "He calls the unity 'of the spirit'…". The incoherence is Migne's and is reproduced, not repaired. This one reads as our error more than most, because the gloss immediately supplies the right word in English: a reader sees "truth" quoted and "unity" expounded, with nothing to tell them which is the plate's.
Not corrected in the text. No citation-corrections.json entry: the reference (Ephes. IV) is correct and resolves correctly — it is the quoted WORDS that are defective, which that mechanism does not cover.
PL 196 polarity sweep (2026-07-28)
Sites found by the volume-wide sweep for sense-reversing defects (dropped or intrusive negations, and single letters that invert a claim). All are Migne's; all are rendered literally per Pattern 7. Entries already discussed above are repeated here so the class can be read in one place.
### 1014B — letter-inversion (high confidence) Printed: Solliciti estote servare veritatem spiritus in vinculo pacis
Conjecture: unitatem spiritus (Eph. IV, 3: 'solliciti servare unitatem Spiritus in vinculo pacis')
The very next sentence glosses the word just quoted as unitas, four times over: 'Unitatem vocat spiritus, illam unitatem quam facit spiritus in corpore Christi, quod est Ecclesia, cujus unitatis vinculum est pax ad quam unitatem nos invitat' — and the whole following paragraph ('Ideo unitatem spiritus servare debemus quia sumus unum corpus, et unus spiritus') hangs on unitas, never on veritas. The lemma denies the word its own exposition assumes.