site: bonaventure

collection: Breviloquium

title: Pars 5, Cap. 2

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 253 -->

### Capitulum II. *De gratia, in quantum iuvat ad bonum meritorium.*

Secundo, Spiritus sancti gratia nobis occurrit consideranda in *comparatione ad liberum arbitrium*, et hoc secundum duplicem modum. Primo scilicet, in quantum ipsa est *adiutorium ad meritum*; secundo vero, in quantum est *remedium contra peccatum*[^p253-5].

De gratia igitur Dei, in quantum est *adiutorium ad merendum*[^p253-6], haec tenenda sunt, quod cum gratia dicatur *generaliter, specialiter* et *proprie*; *generaliter* dicitur adiutorium divinum creaturae liberaliter et gratis impensum et indifferenter ad quemcumque actum; et sine huiusmodi adiutorio gratiae nec possumus aliquid efficere nec durare in *esse*. — *Specialiter* dicitur gratia adiutorium divinitus datum, ut quis praeparet se ad suscipiendum Spiritus sancti donum, quo perveniat ad meriti statum; et talis dicitur gratia *gratis data*, et sine hac nullus sufficienter facit quod in se est, ut se praeparet ad salutem. — *Proprie* vero gratia dicitur adiutorium datum divinitus ad merendum, quod quidem dicitur donum *gratiae gratum facientis*, sine quo nullus potest mereri nec in bono proficere nec ad aeternam pervenire salutem. Ipsa enim tanquam radix merendi omnia merita antecedit; propter quod dictum est[^p253-7], quod « praevenit voluntatem, ut velit; subsequitur autem, ne frustra velit ». Unde nullus ipsam mereri potest merito *condigni*, sed « ipsa meretur augeri a Deo in via, ut aucta mereatur et perfici » in patria et gloria sempiterna ab ipso Deo, cuius est gratiam *infundere, augere* et *perficere* secundum cooperationem voluntatis nostrae et secundum propositum sive beneplacitum praedestinationis aeternae.

Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia, cum primum principium sua omnipotenti virtute et benignissima largitate creaturam omnem de nihilo produxerit ad *esse*; ac per hoc creatura de se habeat *non-esse*, totum autem *esse* habeat aliunde: sic facta fuit, ut ipsa pro sua defectibilitate semper suo principio indigeret et primum principium pro sua benignitate influere non cessaret[^p253-8]. Cum ergo spiritus rationalis, hoc ipso quod de nihilo, sit in se *defectivus*; hoc ipso quod natura limitata et egena, sit *in se recurvus*, amans proprium bonum; hoc ipso quod totus a Deo, sit totaliter *Deo obnoxius*; et quia *defectivus* est, de se tendit in *non-esse*; quia *recurvus*, per se non assurgit ad rectitudinem perfectae iustitiae; quia totaliter *Deo obnoxius*, et Deus bonis eius non indiget[^p253-9], nihil potest facere de se et propria virtute, per quod Deum sibi constituat debitorem, et maxime mercedis aeternae, quae Deus est, nisi per divinam condescensionem: hinc est, quod ad hoc, quod *salvetur in esse*, cum sit *defectivus*, indiget semper adiutorio divinae praesentiae, manutenentiae et influentiae, per quam manuteneatur in *esse*; quae, quamvis sit universalis in creaturas omnes, nominatur tamen nomine *gratiae*, quia non ex debito procedit, sed ex liberalitate bonitatis divinae. — Hinc est etiam, quod ad hoc, ut se *praeparet ad donum supernae gratiae*, cum sit *recurvus*, indiget dono alterius *gratiae gratis datae*, maxime post naturam lapsam, per quam habilis efficiatur ad bona moralia, quae sunt bona ex *circumstantia*[^p254-1], quae nullo modo possunt dici bona, nisi procedant ex intentione recta, videlicet quod non propter nos, sed propter summum bonum fiant, ad quod non assurgit spiritus noster recurvus, nisi praeveniatur a Deo per aliquam gratiam gratis datam. — Hinc nihilominus est, quod ad hoc, quod *faciat opera meritoria* mercedis aeternae; cum totaliter sit *Deo obnoxius* et debitor sui totius, indiget dono *gratiae gratum facientis*, per quam Deus sibi condescendat, prius acceptans suam imaginem et voluntatem quam operationem ex ipsa manantem; quia, cum « causa nobilior sit effectu[^p254-2] », nullus potest se facere meliorem nec facere opus Deo placens, nisi prius placeat ipse, ut Deus prius *ipsum* respiciat quam *ad munera eius*[^p254-3]. Et ideo omnis radix merendi fundatur in gratia gratum faciente, cuius est facere hominem Deo dignum; propter quod nullus potest eam mereri merito *condigni*, sed solum merito *congrui*.

<!-- page 254 -->

Ipsa autem habita *meretur sui ipsius augmentum* in statu viae per bonum eius usum merito *digni*. Nam cum solus Deus sit ipsius gratiae fontale principium influendi, *ipse* solus est principium augmentandi per modum infundentis, et *gratia* per modum meriti et dignitatis, et *liberum arbitrium* per modum cooperantis et merentis, pro eo quod liberum arbitrium *cooperatur* gratiae et quod est gratiae *suum facit*.

Et ideo non tantum liberum arbitrium per gratiam meretur gratiae augmentum in statu viae merito *digni*, verum etiam *complementum* in statu patriae merito *condigni*, tum propter *sublimitatem* doni Spiritus sancti cooperantis in merito; tum propter *veracitatem* Dei promittentis; tum propter *vertibilitatem* liberi arbitrii consentientis et finaliter perseverantis; tum propter *difficultatem* status merendi[^p254-4]; tum propter *dignitatem* Christi nostri capitis intervenientis, quod debet glorificari cum suis membris; tum propter *liberalitatem* Dei retribuentis, quem non decet parva reddere propter obsequium sibi fideliter obtemperantis; tum propter *nobilitatem* operis, quod ex caritate procedit, quod tantum ponderat in conspectu iudicis, quantum amor, ex quo procedit, qui Deum incomparabiliter praeponit omnibus creaturis, et ideo non sufficienter et competenter potest nisi in Deo et summo bono remunerari. — Ex quibus omnibus tanquam ex septem rationibus gloriam aeternam merito non tantum *congrui*, sed etiam *condigni* mereri facit gratia septiformis.

---

english:
### Chapter II. *On grace, in so far as it helps toward meritorious good.*

Second, the grace of the Holy Spirit presents itself to us as to be considered *in comparison with free choice*, and this according to a twofold mode. First, namely, in so far as it is a *help toward merit*; second, in so far as it is a *remedy against sin*[^p253-5].

Concerning the grace of God, therefore, in so far as it is a *help toward meriting*[^p253-6], these things are to be held: that whereas grace is spoken of *generally, specially* and *properly*; *generally*, that divine help is called grace which is bestowed on the creature liberally and gratuitously and indifferently toward any act whatever; and without a help of grace of this kind we can neither accomplish anything nor endure in *being*. — *Specially*, grace is said to be a help divinely given, that one may prepare himself to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, whereby he may arrive at the state of merit; and such is called *gratuitously given grace*, and without this no one sufficiently does what is in him, that he may prepare himself for salvation. — *Properly*, however, grace is said to be a help given divinely for meriting, which indeed is called the gift of *grace making gracious*, without which no one can merit, nor make progress in good, nor arrive at eternal salvation. For it, as the root of meriting, goes before all merits; on account of which it has been said[^p253-7] that it « goes before the will, that it may will; and follows after, lest it will in vain ». Hence no one can merit it by the merit of *condignity*, but « it itself merits to be increased by God on the way, so that, being increased, it may merit also to be perfected » in the fatherland and in everlasting glory by God himself, whose it is *to infuse, to increase* and *to perfect* grace according to the cooperation of our will and according to the purpose or good pleasure of eternal predestination.

Now the reason for the understanding of the foresaid is this: since, when the first principle by its omnipotent power and most benign bounty produced every creature out of nothing into *being*, and through this the creature has of itself *non-being* but has its whole *being* from elsewhere: it was so made that it should, by reason of its defectibility, always stand in need of its principle, and that the first principle should, by reason of its benignity, not cease to flow into it[^p253-8]. Since therefore the rational spirit, by this very thing that it is from nothing, is in itself *defective*; by this very thing that it is a limited and needy nature, is *curved in upon itself*, loving its own good; by this very thing that it is wholly from God, is wholly *beholden to God*; and because it is *defective*, of itself it tends toward *non-being*; because *curved in*, of itself it does not rise up to the rectitude of perfect justice; because wholly *beholden to God*, and God has no need of its goods[^p253-9], it can do nothing of itself and by its own power whereby it might constitute God its debtor, and most of all of the eternal reward, which is God, except through divine condescension: hence it is that, in order that it may *be preserved in being*, since it is *defective*, it always stands in need of the help of the divine presence, maintenance and influence, whereby it may be maintained in *being*; which help, although it is universal toward all creatures, is nevertheless named by the name of *grace*, because it proceeds not out of debt but out of the liberality of the divine goodness. — Hence it is also that, in order that it may *prepare itself for the gift of supernal grace*, since it is *curved in*, it stands in need of the gift of another *grace gratuitously given*, most of all after nature's fall, whereby it may be made capable of moral goods, which are goods from *circumstance*[^p254-1], and which can in no way be called good unless they proceed from a right intention, namely, that they be done not on account of ourselves but on account of the highest good, to which our curved-in spirit does not rise unless it be prevented by God through some grace gratuitously given. — Hence it is nonetheless that, in order that it may *do works meritorious* of the eternal reward, since it is wholly *beholden to God* and the debtor of its whole self, it stands in need of the gift of *grace making gracious*, through which God may condescend to it, first accepting its image and will before the operation flowing from them; because, since « the cause is nobler than the effect[^p254-2] », no one can make himself better nor do a work pleasing to God unless he himself first please, so that God may regard *himself* first rather than *his gifts*[^p254-3]. And therefore every root of meriting is founded in grace making gracious, whose it is to make man worthy of God; on account of which no one can merit it by the merit of *condignity*, but only by the merit of *congruity*.

But grace once had *merits its own increase* in the state of the way through the good use of it, by the merit of *worthiness*. For since God alone is the fontal principle of the infusing of that grace, *he* alone is the principle of its increasing after the manner of one infusing, and *grace* after the manner of merit and dignity, and *free choice* after the manner of one cooperating and meriting, inasmuch as free choice *cooperates* with grace and *makes its own* that which is grace's.

And therefore free choice through grace merits not only the increase of grace in the state of the way by the merit of *worthiness*, but also *completion* in the state of the fatherland by the merit of *condignity*, both on account of the *sublimity* of the gift of the Holy Spirit cooperating in the merit; and on account of the *veracity* of God promising; and on account of the *vertibility* of free choice consenting and finally persevering; and on account of the *difficulty* of the state of meriting[^p254-4]; and on account of the *dignity* of Christ our head interceding, who must be glorified together with his own members; and on account of the *liberality* of God rewarding, whom it does not befit to render small things in return for the service of one faithfully obeying him; and on account of the *nobility* of the work, which proceeds from charity, which weighs as much in the sight of the judge as does the love from which it proceeds, which sets God incomparably before all creatures, and which therefore cannot sufficiently and fittingly be rewarded except in God and the highest good. — From all which, as from seven reasons, sevenfold grace makes one merit eternal glory not only by the merit of *congruity*, but also by the merit of *condignity*.

---

la: De his agitur hic et seq. cap. Sed observandum, quod in tabula supra pag. 209 secundum codd. relata ordo 2. et 3. capituli invertitur cum quadam differentia verborum.

en: These matters are treated here and in the following chapter. But it must be observed that, in the table given above on p. 209 as reported according to the codices, the order of the second and third chapters is inverted, with a certain difference of wording.

la: B C E I M T *meritum*.

en: B C E I M T have *meritum*.

la: Ab August., Enchirid. c. 32. n. 9. — Seq. locus est August., Epist. 186. (alias 106.) c. 3. n. 10. Cfr. II. Sent. lit. Magistri, d. XXVI. c. 2, et Comment. ibid. d. 27. dub. 1, in cuius fine triplex gratiae acceptio explicatur; ibid. a. 2. per totum et d. 28. dub. 2. ostenditur, quid mereri contingat et quid non.

en: From Augustine, *Enchiridion*, c. 32, n. 9. — The following passage is Augustine, *Epistle* 186 (otherwise 106), c. 3, n. 10. Cf. II *Sent.*, the text of the Master, d. XXVI, c. 2, and the Commentary on the same place, d. 27, dub. 1, at the end of which the threefold acceptation of grace is explained; in the same place, a. 2, throughout, and d. 28, dub. 2, it is shown what may be merited and what may not.

la: Vide I. Sent. d. 37. p. I. a. 1. q. 1. in corp.; II. Sent. d. 37. a. 1. q. 1. et 2. — Superius pro editionum lectione *de se non habeat esse* cum B I O P Q S substituimus *de se habeat non-esse* (1 *de se habet non-esse*, quae etiam paulo ante cum aliis edd. *pro-duxit* pro *produxerit*).

en: See I *Sent.*, d. 37, part I, a. 1, q. 1, in the body of the article; II *Sent.*, d. 37, a. 1, qq. 1 and 2. — Above, for the editions' reading *de se non habeat esse* we have substituted, with B I O P Q S, *de se habeat non-esse* (edition 1 has *de se habet non-esse*, which also, a little before, together with the other editions, has *pro-duxit* for *produxerit*).

la: Psalm. 15, 2: Dixi Domino: Deus meus es tu, quoniam bonorum meorum non eges. — Gen. 15, 1: Ego [Deus] protector tuus sum et merces tua magna nimis. — Mox pro *et propria* 1 *ex propria*, quae etiam cum aliis edd. et nonnullis codd. pro *per quod* substituit *propter quod*. Inferius pro *manutenentiae et influentiae* 2 cum aliquot codd. *manutenente et influente*, et pro *universalis* B C et 1 *generalis*.

en: Psalm 15, 2: I said to the Lord: Thou art my God, for thou hast no need of my goods. — Genesis 15, 1: I [God] am thy protector, and thy reward exceeding great. — Shortly after, for *et propria* edition 1 has *ex propria*, which also, together with the other editions and some codices, substitutes *propter quod* for *per quod*. Below, for *manutenentiae et influentiae* edition 2, with a few codices, has *manutenente et influente*, and for *universalis* B C and edition 1 have *generalis*.

en: Cf. II *Sent.*, d. 36, dub. 5, and d. 41, a. 1, q. 1, in the body of the article.

la: Ut notat Avicenna, Metaph. tr. 6. c. 3. Vide tom. IV. pag. 19, nota 9. — De gratiae subiecto cfr. II. Sent. d. 26. q. 5. — Pro *ex ipsa* 2 cum pluribus codd. perperam *ex ipso*, aliae edd. *ex eo*.

en: As Avicenna notes, *Metaphysics*, tract 6, c. 3. See tom. IV, p. 19, note 9. — On the subject of grace cf. II *Sent.*, d. 26, q. 5. — For *ex ipsa* edition 2, with several codices, wrongly has *ex ipso*; the other editions have *ex eo*.

la: Gen. 4, 4: Et respexit Dominus ad Abel et ad munera eius. — Inferius edd., excepta 2, cum pluribus codd. *condigni* pro *digni*; subinde pro *augmentandi* et *infundentis* plures codd. *augendi* et *influentis*.

en: Genesis 4, 4: And the Lord had respect to Abel and to his gifts. — Below, the editions, except edition 2, together with several codices, have *condigni* for *digni*; thereupon, for *augmentandi* and *infundentis* several codices have *augendi* and *influentis*.

la: Plures codd. et 1 *merentis*. Superius pro *digni* M *congrui* (cfr. II. Sent. d. 27. a. 2. q. 2. in corp.), econtra in fine cap. G H K N *digni* pro *congrui*.

en: Several codices and edition 1 have *merentis*. Above, for *digni* M has *congrui* (cf. II *Sent.*, d. 27, a. 2, q. 2, in the body of the article); on the contrary, at the end of the chapter G H K N have *digni* for *congrui*. ---

translators_notes:
**★★ PAGE SPAN — pp. 253–254, BOTH ENDS FIXED POSITIVELY FROM A HEADING ON THE BAND.** `Cap. II. / De gratia, in quantum iuvat ad bonum meritorium.` stands **about two-thirds down p. 253's LEFT column**, three lines below Cap. I's last word, exactly where `bon-brev-p5-c1` placed it. Cap. II gets **only two body lines** in that column (`Secundo, Spiritus sancti gratia nobis occurrit con-` / `sideranda in *comparatione ad liberum arbitrium*,`), crosses p. 253's gutter **at a COMMA after `arbitrium,`**, fills p. 253's right column entire to `…et Deus bonis eius non indiget⁹, nihil potest`, and breaks across the leaf on a **MODAL VERB STRANDED FROM ITS INFINITIVE** (`nihil potest` / `facere de se et propria virtute`) — a tail that is not a complete phrase, the fourth such shape in twelve leaves. It then fills p. 254's left column entire to `…verum etiam *complementum* in statu pa-`, crosses p. 254's gutter **MID-WORD AND HYPHENATED** (`pa-` / `triae merito *condigni*`), and closes about two-thirds down **p. 254's RIGHT column** at `…etiam *condigni* mereri facit gratia septiformis.` **★ The end is fixed POSITIVELY from the `Cap. III. / De gratia, in quantum est remedium peccati.` heading standing immediately below it in the SAME right column**, with Cap. III's own text following. **The index's hypothesis that Cap. III opens on p. 254 is CONFIRMED on the band, and Cap. II's span is pp. 253–254, two printed pages.** No claim here rests on white space, on a grammatically complete tail, or on a running head.

**★★ THE RUNNING HEAD IS ONE UNIT AHEAD FOR THE SEVENTH CONSECUTIVE LEAF.** p. 254's head reads **`BREVILOQUII PARS V. C. III.`** on a page whose left column is Cap. II entire and whose right column is Cap. II for its first third — the same failure as pp. 241, 248, 249, 250, 252 and 253, and the second attestation inside Pars V. The "behind" direction still has no attestation anywhere. Read on the band; the raw prints it `BREVILOQUn PARS V. C. III.`

**★ THE PAGE MARKER SITS AT THE NEAREST PARAGRAPH BOUNDARY BELOW THE BREAK — ELEVENTH CONSECUTIVE OCCURRENCE.** The p. 253/254 leaf break falls inside the *Ratio autem* paragraph, which begins in p. 253's right column and closes part-way down p. 254's left column at `…sed solum merito *congrui*.` — so `<!-- page 254 -->` sits at that paragraph's end and **p. 254's nn. 1, 2 AND 3 all anchor ABOVE the marker**, the largest such stranding yet (previous cases stranded one note). The page-qualified labels absorb it; the marker was not moved to chase the anchors.

**Gutters.** **p. 253 = 1250**, re-measured fresh here with no constant (`colcrop.py vol5 253` → `split_x=1250, low-ink run 60 px`) and confirmed visually on all six bands — the value `bon-brev-p5-c1` adopted, independently reproduced. **p. 254 was extracted and auto-measured FRESH.** `colcrop.py vol5 254` returned **`split_x=1357, low-ink run 51 px`** — **unflagged, but 51 px is BELOW the 58–64 px band that marks a sound measurement on this volume, so the run was treated as suspect on its width alone**, exactly as the rule requires. It was re-profiled over **eighteen** row windows: 45–92 % **1357/51** · 50–85 % **1356/54** · 50–92 % **1357/52** · 55–80 % **1356/55** · 60–90 % **1359/55** · 60–92 % **1359/55** · 65–92 % **1359/56** · 45–80 % **1355/54** · 35–75 % **1355/53** · 30–70 % **1351/57** · 40–65 % **1351/60** · 20–60 % **1349/56** · 25–55 % **1349/59** · 15–85 % **1353/47** · 20–80 % **1353/49** · 15–45 % **1346/60** · 10–45 % **1345/58** · 12–40 % **1345/59**. **The windows do not fork; they DRIFT MONOTONICALLY, from 1345 at the page's top to 1359 at its foot — a 14 px spread that tracks window height, not window width.** ★ **The per-column ink profile was printed anyway, per the standing rule, and it explains the drift twice over.** Over the body rows (45–92 %) the blank gutter runs **x = 1332–1382** (left-column ink falls from 12 at x = 1330 to 0 at x = 1332; right-column ink resumes at 11 on x = 1383) with a **narrow ink island standing INSIDE it at x = 1350–1362**, peaking at **311 rows at x = 1361** against 0 on either side of its shoulders — **the SIXTH leaf out of seven to carry the in-gutter obstruction** (pp. 248, 249, 250, 251, 253, 254; p. 252 is the one between and carried the display-heading failure instead). **The band's midpoint is 1357 and the island's peak is 1361: the island sits 4 px RIGHT of centre**, which is the p. 248/249 shape, not p. 250/251/253's centred one. ★ **And the profile shows a SECOND cause the previous six leaves did not have: the whole text block is SKEWED.** Over the upper rows (15–45 %) the left column's ink ends at x ≈ 1316 and the right column's resumes at x ≈ 1376, while over the body rows they stand at 1330 and 1383 — **both edges migrate ~10 px to the right down the page**, and the obstruction migrates with them (upper-row island x = 1343–1350, peak 559 rows at x = 1347). So the gutter genuinely *moves* on this leaf, and the monotonic window drift is measuring that movement rather than failing. **Adopted 1357** — the default, the body-row consensus (seven body windows spread 1355–1359) and the midpoint of the body-row blank band, all three agreeing — and confirmed visually on all six bands. Series now 1194 · 1337 · 1211 · 1341 · 1210 · 1331 · 1209 · 1338 · 1200 · 1338 · 1228 · 1361 · 1186 · 1367 · 1201 · 1345 · 1209 · 1391 · 1182 · 1390 · 1160 · 1403 · 1250 · **1357**. ★ **1357 is an EVEN page landing 26 px below the even cluster's old floor of 1383 and 129 px above p. 253's odd 1250 — two consecutive leaves, both in the dead zone, on opposite sides of it. Parity predicts nothing; the clusters do not exist. Measure every page, and treat a run under ~60 px as suspect even when the tool does not flag it.**

**Apparatus (9 entries), ownership from anchors on the bands.** This chunk owns **p. 253 nn. 5–9** (inherited) and **p. 254 nn. 1–4** (first-read here). Every anchor below was re-read on the band at 450 dpi under direct high-factor zoom.
- p. 253 n. **5** on `remedium contra peccatum`⁵ — **RIGHT** column, fifth line, closing the opening *divisio*.
- p. 253 n. **6** on `adiutorium ad merendum`⁶ — **RIGHT** column, on the second line of the thesis paragraph.
- p. 253 n. **7** on `propter quod dictum est`⁷ — **RIGHT** column, introducing the quoted Augustinian sentence.
- p. 253 n. **8** on `influere non cessaret`⁸ — **RIGHT** column, closing the *Ratio*'s first period.
- p. 253 n. **9** on `Deus bonis eius non indiget`⁹ — **RIGHT** column, **on the last line of the page**.
- p. 254 n. **1** on `bona ex *circumstantia*`¹ — **LEFT** column, in the *De secundo* member of the *Ratio*.
- p. 254 n. **2** on `causa nobilior sit effectu`² — **LEFT** column, closing the quoted axiom inside the *De tertio* member.
- p. 254 n. **3** on `quam *ad munera eius*`³ — **LEFT** column, ten lines below n. 2, beside the `Est radix merendi.` gloss.
- p. 254 n. **4** on `difficultatem status merendi`⁴ — **RIGHT** column, the fourth member of the sevenfold *Rationes septem*.

**★★ THE INHERITED HAND-OFF, RE-DERIVED — OWNERSHIP HELD FOR ALL FIVE, THE BLOCK COLUMNS HELD FOR ALL FIVE, AND THE ONE DECLARED INFERENCE WAS RIGHT IN ITS COLUMN AND WRONG IN ITS REASON.** `bon-brev-p5-c1` forwarded p. 253 nn. 5–9 with **ownership certain for all five, the COLUMN OF THE FOOTER BLOCK verified for all five (nn. 5–6 left, nn. 7–9 right), and the ANCHOR's column and position verified for NONE** — n. 6's column being explicitly declared an inference. Re-derived here off the band with nothing adopted: **all five belong to Cap. II; all five block columns held; and ALL FIVE ANCHORS STAND IN THE RIGHT COLUMN.** ★ **The decisive finding, which no hand-off could supply, is NEGATIVE: Cap. II's two left-column lines carry NO anchor at all**, verified at ninefold zoom over both lines — so nn. 5 and 6, whose blocks are in the left register, anchor across the gutter in the RIGHT column. That is a **one-note-and-a-half OVERRUN of the block over the anchor**, and it means p. 253's anchors divide **4 / 5 with the capitulum line, while its blocks divide 6 / 3** exactly as `p5-c1` recorded. ★ **n. 6's forwarded inference reached the right answer by the wrong route**: `p5-c1` reasoned that the anchor must be in the right column because the variant is on the word *meritum*, which does not occur in the two left-column lines. The column is right, but the anchor word is **`merendum`**, not *meritum* — the note records that B C E I M T read *meritum* **for** *merendum*, so the lemma the inference leaned on is the variant, not the text. **A declared inference that lands on the right column for a reason that does not survive checking is exactly why the convention says to re-derive, not to adopt.** Every digit and siglum in the five forwarded entries was also re-read from the plate rather than copied, and **all five texts held verbatim**, including the three the raw corrupts (see below).

**★ WHAT THIS CHUNK FORWARDS.** **p. 254's register is SIX notes and only nn. 1–4 anchor in Cap. II.** **`p. 254 nn. 5–6 are forwarded to `bon-brev-p5-c3` as a PENDING**, both anchoring in Pars V, Cap. III:
- n. **5** — `De hac dictione Bernardo a Scholasticis tributa cfr. tom. II. pag. 115, nota 6. — Quid valeat liberum arbitrium absque gratia gratum faciente et gratis data, ostenditur II. Sent. d. 28. per totam. — Inferius pro *Illa autem* 2 cum pluribus codd. *Ipsa autem*. Subinde verbo *concurrunt* M praemittit *sunt necessaria et*.` **RIGHT** footer block. **OWNERSHIP verified · COLUMN of the block verified · ANCHOR POSITION VERIFIED: it stands on `« sub Deo potentissimum »`⁵ in Cap. III's first thesis, RIGHT column, beside the `Thesis 1.` gloss** — read directly on the band, not inferred.
- n. **6** — `De his quatuor requisitis vide IV. Sent. d. 17. p. I. per totam.` **RIGHT** footer block. **OWNERSHIP verified · COLUMN of the block verified · ANCHOR POSITION VERIFIED: it stands on `ut tandem *perveniat* ad salutem`⁶, RIGHT column, closing Cap. III's *Thesis 3* paragraph** — read directly on the band. The four *requisita* the note names are the `infusio gratiae, expulsio culpae, contritio et motus liberi arbitrii` of the same paragraph, which corroborates the placement independently.
- **★ Everything above is a CLAIM TO RE-DERIVE, never a fact to adopt.** For both notes this chunk verified **POSITION, COLUMN and OWNERSHIP** on the band, and neither rests on an inference.
- **★ ALSO FORWARDED, AND NOT A NOTE: an apparent error in a NEIGHBOURING chunk's already-committed text.** p. 253 n. 2 — owned by `bon-brev-p5-c1`, not by this chunk — renders the plate's `et ante *hereditatem* edd. 1, 3 addunt *beatitudinis*` as **`codd. 1, 3`**, translated "codices 1, 3". On the band at sixfold zoom the word is a three-letter **`edd.`** (the raw agrees: `edd. 1 , 3`), and `1` and `3` are edition sigla everywhere else in this register. **Nothing is edited here — the entry is not this chunk's to touch — but it should be corrected in `bon-brev-p5-c1` and is recorded so that it is not lost.**

**Runover findings — ONE POSITIVE PAGE-CROSSING (INHERITED) AND ONE POSITIVE GUTTER, BOTH CLOSED FROM BOTH SIDES AND BOTH LOGGED.**
- *Page-crossing, p. 253 → p. 254 — **POSITIVE**, and CLOSED HERE FROM THE p. 254 SIDE, as owed.* `bon-brev-p5-c1` established that p. 253's right block breaks off **MID-WORD** at `— Gen. 15, 1: Ego [Deus] pro-` and left the p. 254 side open because p. 254 had not been imaged. p. 254's left footer block was read **from its first character at high zoom** and opens **UNNUMBERED**: `tector tuus sum et merces tua magna nimis. — Mox pro *et propria* 1 *ex propria*, …` ★ **The strongest available check applies and it passes exactly: the entry is quoting a VERSE, so the halves must meet where the Vulgate says they meet — Gen. 15, 1 is *Ego protector tuus sum, et merces tua magna nimis*, and the halves meet at `pro-` / `tector`.** Rendered joined under the p. 253 n. 9 label and logged as `p.253 n.9:page` on this chunk's ledger line. **This is the fourth runover in the corpus to fall inside a quoted verse and the second to fall inside one MID-WORD.**
- *Gutter-crossing within p. 254 — **POSITIVE**, inside n. 3, and closed here from both sides.* p. 254's left block carries the p. 253 n. 9 tail, then nn. 1 and 2 complete, then breaks off inside n. 3 at `— Inferius edd., excepta 2, cum pluribus codd. *condigni*` — **a word boundary INSIDE AN EDITORIAL LEMMA, stopping ON the variant reading itself**, so that the *pro* clause it governs stands on the other side of the gutter. p. 254's right block opens **UNNUMBERED** with `pro *digni*; subinde pro *augmentandi* et *infundentis* plures codd. *augendi* et *influentis*.` then nn. 4–6, closing complete. Rendered joined under the p. 254 n. 3 label and logged as `p.254 n.3:gutter`. ★ **This join earns a check of a kind not previously used: the joined clause is a statement ABOUT the body text, and the body confirms it — the plate really does read `merito digni` twice (`per bonum eius usum merito digni`, `in statu viae merito digni`), both verified at fivefold zoom with no hyphen on the preceding line, so `condigni pro digni` describes exactly what stands above. The apparatus and the body corroborate each other across the break.**
- *Page-crossing, p. 254 → p. 255 — **NOT RUN, AND NOT OWED.*** Cap. II closes part-way down p. 254's **right** column and `Cap. III.` opens below it, so the p. 254 → p. 255 test belongs to `bon-brev-p5-c3`, which owns p. 254's last note. It is neither run nor logged here. (p. 254's right block in any case ends complete at n. 6, `…vide IV. Sent. d. 17. p. I. per totam.`, with clear white paper below — the p. 254 side reads negative, but the test is not this chunk's to close.)
- *NOT re-logged here, both closed by `p5-c1`:* the p. 252 → p. 253 page-crossing test and p. 253's own gutter test.

**★★ p. 254's THREE LINES, AND A FIFTEENTH FOOTER CONFIGURATION.** p. 254's **anchors** divide **3 / 3** across the gutter (nn. 1–3 left, nn. 4–6 right). Its **blocks** divide **3 / 3 with the split falling INSIDE n. 3** — the note whose anchor stands **LAST in the FIRST column**. Its **capitulum boundary** falls between nn. 4 and 5. **So the block line and the anchor line COINCIDE, and the capitulum line stands ONE NOTE BELOW both.** This is the mirror of pp. 248 and 251, where the split fell inside the note whose anchor stood **first in the second column**; here it falls inside the note whose anchor stands **last in the first**, and the practical consequence is the opposite one — the runover crosses the gutter in the direction *opposite* to its own anchor. ★ **Note also that p. 254's left block opens with a FOREIGN page's unnumbered runover tail AND its right block opens with its OWN unnumbered runover tail, so BOTH blocks on one page open unnumbered while the register is still six.** Only p. 247 previously opened a block with a foreign tail, and no page has ever done both at once. **Neither unnumbered opener is an entry.**

**Digits and sigla settled off the bands** (450 dpi; every upright compared against a same-line or same-entry contrast before being recorded). **Three raw readings are corrected here; two are siglum failures and one is a wrong digit, and the two digit classes split one to nothing — the fourth consecutive leaf-pair with a different profile.**
- **★★ `A B E M P` (p. 253 n. 2 — NOT this chunk's entry, checked only as a contrast) and `B C E I M T` (p. 253 n. 6) — the raw gives `A D E M P` and `B C E 1 M T`.** The `B`-for-`D` failure is the one `p5-c1` already recorded on p. 252 n. 4; the `I`-for-`1` failure is the chronic one. In n. 6 the third glyph is **a single upright with slab serifs top and bottom**, and all three siglum rules agree: **(a) one upright is NEVER `H`**; **(b) `B C E I M T` is alphabetical while `B C E 1 M T` would put an edition siglum inside a run of codices**; **(c) the grammar `<witnesses> meritum` requires witnesses.** Read as `I`.
- **★ `B I O P Q S` (p. 253 n. 8) — read clean, and the same entry supplies its own `1`/`I` contrast set eleven characters later.** `cum B I O P Q S substituimus` sets a slab-serifed codex `I` between `B` and `O`; `(1 de se habet non-esse` sets an **angled top flag, closed stem, no lower serif** — the edition `1`. **Both readings are grammatically admissible here (`I` is a codex in the same entry and `1` an edition), so only the glyph decides**, and the two stand four words apart for direct comparison.
- **★★ `G H K N` (p. 254 n. 4) — THE CROSSBAR-REDUCED `H`, THIRTEENTH INSTANCE, AND ALL THREE RULES WERE NEEDED.** The second glyph sets **two uprights joined by a bar reduced almost to a shadow**. **(a) Stroke count: two uprights, so `H` is admissible and `I` is not.** **(b) Alphabetical position: `G H K N` is alphabetical; nothing else fits the slot.** **(c) Grammar: `in fine cap. <witnesses> digni pro congrui` requires witnesses.** The raw gives `G H K N` correctly here, but the crossbar itself was again unreadable at 450 dpi. **Never read the crossbar.**
- **★ `B C` (p. 253 n. 9's continuation) — TWO SOUND SIGLA CARRYING A STRAY MARK, RENDERED WHOLE.** `et pro *universalis* B C et 1 *generalis*` sets `B` and `C` with a **small detached ink spur standing above and between them**, which at ninefold zoom is a speck and not a macron: it touches neither letter's shoulder and has no stroke weight. Recorded, not flagged; and the same line's `et 1 generalis` sets the flag-topped edition `1` against the two roman capitals for contrast.
- **★★ `d. 41.` (p. 254 n. 1) — the `1`/`4` class, settled TWICE OVER on one line.** `Cfr. II. Sent. d. 36. dub. 5. et d. 41. a. 1. q. 1. in corp.` puts a crossbarred `4`, three flagged `1`s, a `5` with a flat top bar over a single bowl and a two-bowled `6` inside eleven characters — **use that line as this leaf's contrast set the way Pars IV used p. 248 n. 5's `q. 3. / d. 15.` pair.** ★ **Sense confirms it independently: II *Sent.* d. 41 is the distinction on the goodness and malice of acts from their circumstances and on intention, and d. 41 a. 1 q. 1 asks whether every human act is good or evil — which is precisely the anchor's `bona moralia, quae sunt bona ex circumstantia … nisi procedant ex intentione recta`. d. 36 dub. 5 is on the same matter.**
- **`Metaph. tr. 6. c. 3.`, `tom. IV. pag. 19, nota 9.`, `II. Sent. d. 26. q. 5.` (p. 254 n. 2), `d. 27. a. 2. q. 2.` (n. 4), `tom. II. pag. 115, nota 6.`, `II. Sent. d. 28.` (n. 5) and `IV. Sent. d. 17. p. I.` (n. 6) — all read clean, each against its own contrast.** `d. 26. q. 5.` sets the two-bowled `3`-shape against the flat-barred `5` two lines below the `c. 3.` of the same entry; `pag. 115` sets two flagged `1`s beside a `5`. ★ **Sense checks pass on every citation that has one: II *Sent.* d. 26 is the distinction *de gratia* and its q. 5 asks after grace's subject, which is what the note says it does; IV *Sent.* d. 17 p. I is *de poenitentia* and states the requisites of the justification of the sinner, which is the four-membered list at n. 6's anchor; Gen. 4, 4 IS *Et respexit Dominus ad Abel et ad munera eius*, quoted in the note and echoed in the anchor's own `ut Deus prius ipsum respiciat quam ad munera eius`; and Psalm 15, 2 IS *quoniam bonorum meorum non eges*, which is the anchor's `Deus bonis eius non indiget` word for word.**
- **One raw digit failure only, and it is in a citation this chunk does not own** — the raw's `Psalm. 1.5,2` and `Gen. 1 .') , 1` for `15, 2` and `15, 1`, which are damage rather than confusion. **No `1`/`4` or `3`/`5` misreading survived into this chunk's text from the raw.** ★ **That makes FOUR consecutive leaf-pairs with four different profiles (3–0, 4–1, 1–1, 0–0). There is no dominant class, and on this leaf the raw's weak point is again the SIGLA, not the digits.**

**Preserved as printed, not harmonised.**
- **★★ TWO BATTERED SORTS ON ONE LEAF, BOTH RENDERED WHOLE AND RECORDED, AND THE FIRST IS THE WORST YET.** **(i) `actum` (p. 253's right column, in the *generaliter* member) PRINTS AS a hook, a stray point and `um`** — the letters `a c t` have **failed to print almost entirely**, leaving a word-shaped gap with one faint remnant, and the raw independently gives `aim`. **Rendered whole as `actum`**, because the grammar (`indifferenter ad quemcumque ___`) demands an accusative singular, because the doctrine of *general* grace is precisely divine concurrence with any *act*, and because the surviving `um` fixes the ending. **This is a dropped sort, not a plate error and not an ambiguity — the p. 253 `vigorem` case one leaf back, one degree worse.** **(ii) `aliae` (p. 254 n. 2) PRINTS AS `aliac`** — the final `e` has lost its crossbar, and the clean `e`s of `edd.` and `ex eo` stand on the same line for comparison. `aliac` is not a Latin word and `aliae edd.` is the entry's own formula. Rendered whole, recorded.
- **★ A THIRD, LIGHTER CASE, ALSO RENDERED WHOLE: `gloriam` (p. 254's right column) PRINTS WITH A STRAY POINT OVER THE `l`,** so that both the plate and the raw read `gioriam`. The stroke is full ascender height — taller than the `i` of `-riam` three letters later — and `gloriam aeternam` is required by the sentence and by `Meretur condigne gloriam.` in the margin beside it. Rendered `gloriam`; the speck recorded, not flagged.
- **★★ THE `Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia` COLON — FIFTEENTH consecutive attestation** (Pars III capp. IX–XI, Pars IV capp. I–X, Pars V capp. I–II). It opens here on a plain causal `cum` period (`quia, cum primum principium … produxerit`), the same shape Cap. I took, **the second time in the corpus that two consecutive capitula have taken the *Ratio* the same way** and the first time it has happened across the opening of a pars.
- **★★ THE EM-DASH ARTICULATION TAKES AN ELEVENTH DISTINCT DISTRIBUTION, AND IT IS THE FIRST IN WHICH A DASH MARKS A CONCLUSION RATHER THAN A MEMBER.** Cap. II puts **NO** dash in its opening *divisio* (the twofold `Primo scilicet … secundo vero` is marked by the ordinals alone); **TWO** in the thesis paragraph, marking members 2 and 3 of a **threefold** division (`— *Specialiter*` · `— *Proprie*`), `generaliter` undashed; **TWO** in the *Ratio*, again marking members 2 and 3 of a **threefold** answering division (`— Hinc est etiam` · `— Hinc nihilominus est`), the first member (`hinc est, quod ad hoc, quod salvetur in esse`) undashed; **NONE** in the *Ipsa autem habita* paragraph; and **exactly ONE** in the closing paragraph — where it does **not** mark a member at all but introduces the summation (`— Ex quibus omnibus tanquam ex septem rationibus`). ★ **And the capitulum's largest enumeration, the SEVENfold `tum propter …` series, carries NOT ONE DASH**, being marked by the repetition of `tum propter` alone. **Five dashes, five paragraphs, two threefold divisions marked identically, a sevenfold division marked not at all, and one dash spent on a conclusion.** Transcribed, never regularised, and never counted from the number of members.
- **★ THE PLATE'S TYPOGRAPHY WAS FOLLOWED PER PARAGRAPH AND NOT REGULARISED, AND CAP. II IS THE MIRROR OF PARS IV CAP. VII.** Where Cap. VII set its threefold statement of *mereri* entirely roman and italicised its division-tags, **Cap. II italicises the tags of its threefold division *and* every repetition of them** (*generaliter, specialiter* et *proprie*, then *generaliter* · *Specialiter* · *Proprie*), while its **sevenfold** division italicises **only the abstract noun of each member** (*sublimitatem* · *veracitatem* · *vertibilitatem* · *difficultatem* · *dignitatem* · *liberalitatem* · *nobilitatem*) and leaves every governing and dependent word roman. ★ **A second asymmetry inside one period, four lines apart: `sit in se *defectivus*` italicises the adjective alone, while `sit *in se recurvus*` italicises the prepositional phrase with it** — and both terms recur four lines later, `*defectivus*` and `*recurvus*`, each italic and each bare. **The plate's italic is not a rule that may be completed.** Likewise `merito *condigni*` · `merito *congrui*` · `merito *digni*` italicise the genitive only, throughout.
- **★ THE PLATE'S `merito digni` IS NOT AN ERROR AND WAS NOT CORRECTED TO `condigni`.** It stands twice, and p. 254 n. 3 records `condigni pro digni` as the reading of the editions and several codices against it, while n. 4 records M reading `congrui` for one of them and `G H K N` reading `digni` for the chapter's closing `congrui`. **Three readings of one word across four places, all recorded by the editors and none harmonised in either direction — body against apparatus, or one occurrence against another.**
- **`Deus`, `Deo`, `Deum`, `Dei`, `Spiritus sancti`, `Christi`, `Psalm.`, `Gen.` are capitalised as printed**, and `gratia`, `liberum arbitrium`, `spiritus rationalis` are not; the English follows.

**Enumerations preserved exactly.** The opening **TWOFOLD** division of the whole comparison of grace with free choice — grace as *adiutorium ad meritum* · grace as *remedium contra peccatum* — of which this capitulum takes only the first, the second being Cap. III's. Then the **THREEFOLD** acceptation of the word *gratia* (*generaliter* · *specialiter* · *proprie*), answered in the *Ratio* by a **THREEFOLD** statement of the corresponding needs (to be *preserved in being* · to *prepare itself for grace* · to *do meritorious works*), the two series running strictly parallel, member for member. Within the third member, the **TWOFOLD** merit (*merito condigni* / *merito congrui*) and the **THREEFOLD** principle of grace's increase (*Deus* by infusing · *gratia* by merit and dignity · *liberum arbitrium* by cooperating and meriting). Finally the **SEVENFOLD** reason why free choice merits glory *condigne* — *sublimitas* · *veracitas* · *vertibilitas* · *difficultas* · *dignitas* · *liberalitas* · *nobilitas* — closing on `gratia septiformis`, which names the seven back to the sevenfold grace of Pars V's own subject. ★ **The two threefold series ARE parallel and the plate's glosses say so** (`Primo.` · `Secundo.` · `Tertio.` against `De sensu primo.` · `De secundo.` · `De tertio.`) — **the first parallel pair in Pars V, and the first anywhere in the corpus in which the answering series is keyed by ordinal rather than by `Pro thesi N.`**

**Marginalia** (Quaracchi editorial side-glosses, trimmed from the body per corpus convention; logged here in body order). p. 253 L — **none**: Cap. II's heading and its two body lines carry no gloss at all, verified by reading the left margin strip beside them. p. 253 R — "Gratia dicitur tripliciter." · "Primo." · "Secundo." · "Tertio." · "Ratio." · "De sensu primo." p. 254 L — "De secundo." · "De tertio." · "Est radix merendi." · "Habita meretur augeri." · "Notandum." · "Meretur condigne gloriam." p. 254 R — "Rationes septem." **Thirteen glosses across five paragraphs, and a TWELFTH distinct form — the first in the corpus with NO `Thesis N.` / `Pro thesi N.` series at all.** ★ **What replaces it is a strictly parallel ordinal pair: a heading gloss (`Gratia dicitur tripliciter.`) opening a three-member series `Primo. · Secundo. · Tertio.`, then a `Ratio.` gloss opening its three-member answer `De sensu primo. · De secundo. · De tertio.` — and the answering series NAMES its first member (`De sensu primo.`) and then drops the noun for the other two**, which is the Cap. IX trap (a named rather than numbered first answer) in a new dress: a reader looking for a third `De sensu …` finds only `De secundo.` and `De tertio.` and would wrongly take them for a different series. ★ **And three unnumbered topical glosses (`Est radix merendi.` · `Habita meretur augeri.` · `Notandum.`) stand INSIDE the answering series' third member, between `De tertio.` and the closing `Rationes septem.`, so the parallel pair is complete and correct and is nonetheless interrupted three times from within.** **Transcribe the glosses as printed; regularise nothing; never infer a capitulum's gloss form from its neighbour's — Cap. I's was a `Thesis`/`Pro thesi` pair and Cap. II's has no `Thesis` in it at all.**

**No `[?]` flags.** Four readings could have carried one — the destroyed `actum`, the crossbar-less `aliae`, the specked `gloriam`, and the `d. 41` of p. 254 n. 1 — and each is settled positively on the band, by grammar, by a same-line glyph contrast, by the surviving letters, or by the cited text checking itself against its anchor. The reasoning is recorded above in full rather than compressed into a flag. The three typographic oddities are battered or specked sorts rendered whole, not ambiguities.

**★ NEITHER SIGNATURE FALLS ON p. 253 OR p. 254.** `S. Bonav. — Tom. V.` and the quire signature both last fell on p. 249; pp. 250–254 carry neither, so the printer's signature's ~8-leaf cadence still points to roughly **p. 257**, inside Pars V. Neither is ever an entry. **p. 253's register is nine** (band-derived by `p5-c1`, re-confirmed here) **and p. 254's is six**, band-derived here and newly fed to `check-vol5-apparatus.py`.

**Raw-quality verdict, per page AND per region.** The bodies were re-set line-by-line from the bands; the raw was consulted only as a cross-check and is graded here for the next Pars V agent's benefit.
- **p. 253, right column — POOR, and the WORST body column in Partes IV–V, facing the cleanest one across a single gutter.** `adiuluriiim ad merilum`, `cundo vro`, `conlra pcccalum`, `adiutoriinn ad nwremhim` (**both words DESTROYED**), `li;iec`, `(luod`, `dic;itur geiwraliter`, `crealiinie libeni-liter` (**`creaturae` DESTROYED**), `imiicnsuiii` (**`impensum` DESTROYED**), `indilTerentcr ;id (picin-cumque` (**`quem-` DESTROYED**), `siiie liuiusiiiodi adintorio`, `iicc possumus ;diqui(l elficere nec (]iir;ire iii esse` (**four words damaged in one line**), `d;ilnm`, `Spiritns s;incti`, `perveni;it`, `taiis`, `dicjlur`, `suHi-cientcr f;icit`, `doiinin`, `Iwno`, `t;mquam`, `qu(xl dictum esf`, `ips;im`, `potcst inerito`, `auct<a`, `^mn infurulcre` (**`gratiam infundere` DESTROYED**), `sccmdiim`, `teneplacitnm` (**`beneplacitum` DESTROYED**), `Kalio`, `oe sensu`, `habe;it nott-me` (**`non-esse` DESTROYED**), `e^w`, `benignitale`, `recwvus`, `iustiliae`, `totaltter`, `iion indiget`. **About forty-five garbles in fifty printed lines, with EIGHT words destroyed.** ★ **Density HIGH, severity HIGH.** ★★ **And the decisive comparison: `p5-c1` graded p. 253's LEFT column the cleanest column on either of its leaves — thirty garbles, no word destroyed. The two columns of ONE page, across ONE gutter, are two full grades apart, and the direction is the opposite of p. 252's. The grade is not a property of the page; it is not even a property of the leaf.** All six right-margin glosses are damaged (`Gralia dici-tur iripiici-ter.`, `sccundo.`, `Tcnio.`, `Raiio.`, `oe sensu` with its second line lost).
- **p. 254, left column — GOOD.** `debitoreni`, `maxirjie`, `qaod saloelur`, `ckfeclivus`, `graliae`, `liberahtate`, `swpernae graliac`, `gralis`, `habi-hs efliciatur`, `moraha`, `circumstaniia`, `videhcet`, `bomini` (**`bonum` DESTROYED**), `ron-descendat`, `suajn`, `efl^ectu`, `od munera eius`, `fociente`, `uugmen-tum`, `gratiac`, `au-gmentandi`, `gralia`, `arbilrium`, `graliae`. **About twenty-five garbles in fifty printed lines, with ONE word destroyed and no lost interior space.** ★ **Density LOW, severity LOW — and the leaf reverses direction across its own leaf break, from the worst column to a good one in a single line.** Four of the six left-margin glosses survive readably (`De sccundo.`, `Deteriio.` with the space lost, `sotandum.` for `Notandum.`); **two are destroyed** — `Est radix ^eTeuAi.` for `Est radix merendi.` and `Mcrcturcon- … ram!` for `Meretur condigne gloriam.`, the latter losing an entire line.
- **p. 254, right column — GOOD, and a step below the left.** `SM6/z"m«totem` (**`sublimitatem` DESTROYED — the worst single word on the leaf**), `ver-libiUtalem`, `di/Jicultatem`, `dignilatem`, `capilis`, `obtcmperantis`, `propler nobiiitatem`, `suflicienter`, `gioriam` (**the plate's own specked `l`, reproduced by the raw**), `coUigitur`, `reiuedium`, `cxdpae, conlrilio`, `libcri arhitrii`, `tainen`, `Tiiesis -2.`, `qratis`, `oradns 5 in`. **About twenty garbles in forty printed lines, with ONE word destroyed.** ★ **Density LOW, severity MODERATE, and the severity is again concentrated in a single word.**
- **p. 253 footer, right block (nn. 7–9, this chunk's) — GOOD.** `Ab Augusl., Encliirid. c. 32. n. 9.` clean in every digit, `Epist. 186. (alias 106.) c. 3. n. 10.` clean, `d. XXVI. c. 2` clean, `d. 27. dub. 1` clean, `linc Iriplex`, `pcr lotum`, `il. 28. dul). 2.`, `Vidc I. Sent. d. 37. p. I. a. 1. q. I. in corp.` (**the last `1` set as a roman `I`**), `B I 0 P Q S` (**the `O` set as a zero**), `nov liabeat`, `haheal nnv-esse`, `pro-diixit`, `Psalm. 1.5,2`, `Gen. 1 .') , 1` (**`15` destroyed**). **About fifteen garbles across thirteen printed lines, with NO wrong digit of the confusable classes and TWO mangled sigla.**
- **p. 253 footer, left block (nn. 5–6, this chunk's) — GOOD.** `De liis agitur hic el seq. cap.`, `nuod`, `relato ordn 2.' el 3.` (**`relata ordo` damaged**), `capitidi invcrtitur`, `dilTcrentia`, `B C E 1 M T mcritiim.` (**the codex `I` set as the edition `1`**). **Six garbles in five printed lines, one wrong siglum, no wrong digit.**
- **p. 254 footer, both blocks — GOOD, and the second-cleanest register in Partes IV–V after p. 253's left.** `tector tuus sum et merces tua magna nimis` clean, `pro et propria 1 ex propria` clean including the edition siglum, `manutenentiae et influentiae 2` clean, `pro universalis B C et 1 generalis` clean, `Cfr. II. Sent. d. 36. dub. 5. et d. 41. a. 1. q. 1. in corp.` **clean in every digit**, `Metaph. tr. 6. c. 3.` clean, `tom. IV. pag. 19, nota 9.` clean, `d. 26. q. 5.` clean, `Gen. 4, 4` clean, `Plures codd. et 1 merentis` clean, `G H K N` clean, `d. 27. a. 2. q. 2.` clean, `tom. II. pag. 115, nota 6.` clean, `II. Sent. d. 28. per totam` clean, `IV. Sent. d. 17. p. I. per totam` clean. **Not one wrong digit and not one wrong siglum in six entries and one runover tail.** ★ **So the leaf's footers and bodies again run in opposite directions — p. 253's worst body column faces a clean register, and p. 254's clean register sits under two good columns. Grade the run, never the page, and never carry a footer grade across a gutter or a leaf.**

method: LLM-assisted translation from the Quaracchi Latin, verified chunk-by-chunk against the printed plates (apparatus roster, cross-references, page/gutter boundaries).

license_source: Public Domain Mark 1.0

license_translation: CC BY-NC 4.0

license_apparatus: CC BY-NC 4.0