title: Pars 4, Cap. 3

title_alt:
De incarnatione quantum ad modum
On the incarnation as regards the mode

source_text:
<!-- page 243 -->

### Capitulum III. *De incarnatione quantum ad modum.*

De *modo* incarnationis hoc tenendum est, quod Angelo nuntiante beatissimae Virgini Mariae mysterium incarnationis perficiendum in ipsa, Virgo credidit, appetiit et consensit; Spiritus sanctus in eam supervenit[^p243-4] ad sanctificandum et fecundandum, cuius virtute « Virgo concepit Dei Filium, quem Virgo peperit et post partum Virgo permansit ». — Concepit autem non solum carnem, verum etiam carnem animatam et Verbo unitam, nulli peccato obnoxiam, sed omnino sanctam et immaculatam, ratione cuius *mater Dei* dicitur et est dulcissima Virgo Maria.

Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia incarnatio est opus manans a primo principio, in quantum est reparativum modo *congruentissimo, communissimo* et *completissimo*. Decet enim eius *sapientiam* operari *congrue*, decet eius *largitatem* operari[^p243-5] *communiter*, et *virtutem*, operari *perfecte*.

Quoniam ergo incarnatio est a primo principio reparante modo *congruentissimo*; et congruus modus est, quod medicina ex opposito respondeat morbo, et reparatio lapsui, et remedium nocumento; cum genus humanum lapsum fuerit per *diabolicam suggestionem*, et per *consensum mulieris* deceptae et per *generationem concupiscentialem*, transfundentem originale in prolem[^p243-6]: oportuit, quod e contrario hic esset *Angelus bonus* suadens bonum, et *Virgo credens* et consentiens in bonum suasum, et *caritas Spiritus sancti* sanctificans et fecundans ad conceptum immaculatum; ut sic « contraria contrariis curarentur[^p243-7] ». Ac per hoc, sicut mulier, per diabolum decepta et per virum concupiscibiliter cognita et corrupta, transfudit in omnes culpam, morbum et mortem; sic mulier, per Angelum erudita et per Spiritum sanctum sanctificata et fecundata, absque omni corruptione tam mentis quam corporis prolem generaret, quae omnibus ad ipsam venientibus daret gratiam, sanitatem et vitam.

Rursus, quia incarnatio est a primo principio reparante modo *communissimo* — nam per Verbum incarnatum reparatur lapsus hominum et angelorum, utpote caelestium et terrestrium[^p243-8] et hominum lapsus reparatur secundum utrumque sexum — ut medicamentum sit *commune omnibus*, decentissimum fuit, quod ad incarnationis mysterium fieret concursus *Angeli, mulieris* et *viri: Angeli* ut denuntiantis, *mulieris Virginis* ut concipientis, *viri* vero ut conceptae prolis; ut sic *Angelus Gabriel* esset nuntius Patris aeterni, *Virgo immaculata* esset templum Spiritus sancti, *proles concepta* esset ipsa persona Verbi; ac per hoc in communi reparatione omnium communis fieret concursus trium de triplici hierarchia, scilicet divina, angelica et humana, ad insinuandam non solum Trinitatem Dei, verum etiam generalitatem beneficii et liberalitatem reparatoris summi. Et quoniam *liberalitas* Spiritui sancto appropriatur et *sanctificatio Virginis*, in qua peracta fuit Verbi conceptio; hinc est, quod licet opus illud sit a tota Trinitate, *per appropriationem* tamen dicitur Virgo concepisse de Spiritu sancto[^p243-9].

Postremo, quoniam est a primo principio reparante modo *completissimo*; hinc est, quod in conceptione completio debita fuit in *prole*, fuit in *conceptu*, fuit et in *virtute concipiente*. Quia completio debita debuit esse in *prole*, hinc est, quod in instanti conceptionis non tantum fuit seminis decisio, verum etiam consolidatio, configuratio, vivificatio per animam et deificatio per Deitatem unitam; ut sic Virgo Dei Filium vere conciperet propter[^p244-1] unionem carnis ad Deitatem, mediante spiritu rationali, per quem tanquam per medium congruentiae caro erat idonea ad unionem. — Quia vero completio debita debuit esse in *conceptu*; cum ex quatuor modis tres modi producendi hominem praecessissent: primus nec de viro nec muliere, sicut in Adam; secundus de viro sine muliere, sicut in Eva; tertius de muliere et viro, sicut in omnibus concupiscibiliter natis: decuit, ad complementum universi quartum modum introduci, qui scilicet esset de muliere sine semine virili per virtutem summi operatoris[^p244-2]. — Quia vero completio debita debuit esse in *virtute*; hinc est, quod in conceptione Filii Dei simul concurrit virtus *innata*, virtus *infusa* et virtus *increata*: virtus *innata* materiam praeparavit, virtus *infusa* purificando segregavit, virtus *increata subito* perfecit quod non poterat a virtute creata nisi *successive* fieri. Et sic beatissima Virgo Maria mater fuit completissimo modo, ipsum Dei Filium concipiendo absque viro, fecundante Spiritu sancto. Quia enim in mente Virginis amor Spiritus sancti singulariter ardebat; ideo in carne eius virtus Spiritus sancti mirabilia faciebat, gratia scilicet partim *excitante*, partim *adiuvante*, partim *elevante* naturam, iuxta quod conceptus ille mirabilis exigebat.

<!-- page 244 -->

---

english:
### Chapter III. *On the incarnation as regards the mode.*

Concerning the *mode* of the incarnation this is to be held: that, when the Angel announced to the most blessed Virgin Mary the mystery of the incarnation to be accomplished in her, the Virgin believed, desired and consented; the Holy Spirit came upon her[^p243-4] to sanctify and to make fruitful, by whose power « the Virgin conceived the Son of God, whom the Virgin bore and after the birth remained a Virgin ». — Now she conceived not only flesh, but also flesh ensouled and united to the Word, liable to no sin, but wholly holy and immaculate, by reason of which the sweetest Virgin Mary is called and is the *mother of God*.

Now the reason for the understanding of the foresaid is this: since the incarnation is a work flowing from the first principle, inasmuch as it is reparative in a mode *most fitting, most common* and *most complete*. For it befits his *wisdom* to work *fittingly*, it befits his *bounty* to work[^p243-5] *commonly*, and his *power*, to work *perfectly*.

Since therefore the incarnation is from the first principle repairing in the *most fitting* mode; and the fitting mode is that the medicine answer from the opposite side to the disease, and the repair to the fall, and the remedy to the harm; since the human race had fallen through the *devil's suggestion*, and through the *consent of the woman* deceived, and through *generation in concupiscence*, transmitting the original [taint] into the offspring[^p243-6]: it behoved that on the contrary there should here be a *good Angel* persuading to good, and a *believing Virgin* also consenting to the good persuaded, and the *charity of the Holy Spirit* sanctifying and making fruitful unto an immaculate conception; so that thus « contraries might be cured by contraries[^p243-7] ». And through this, as the woman, deceived by the devil and known in concupiscence by the man and corrupted, transmitted into all guilt, disease and death; so a woman, instructed by an Angel and sanctified and made fruitful by the Holy Spirit, without any corruption either of mind or of body, should generate an offspring which would give grace, health and life to all who came to her.

Again, because the incarnation is from the first principle repairing in the *most common* mode — for through the incarnate Word the fall of men and of angels is repaired, as of things heavenly and earthly[^p243-8], and the fall of men is repaired according to either sex — so that the medicament might be *common to all*, it was most fitting that for the mystery of the incarnation there should come about a concurrence *of an Angel, of a woman* and *of a man: of the Angel* as announcing, *of the woman, a Virgin,* as conceiving, and *of the man* indeed as [the father] of the offspring conceived; so that thus *the Angel Gabriel* should be the messenger of the eternal Father, *the immaculate Virgin* should be the temple of the Holy Spirit, *the offspring conceived* should be the very person of the Word; and through this, in the common reparation of all there should come about a common concurrence of three from the threefold hierarchy, namely the divine, the angelic and the human, to intimate not only the Trinity of God, but also the generality of the benefit and the liberality of the highest repairer. And since *liberality* is appropriated to the Holy Spirit, and the *sanctification of the Virgin*, in which the conception of the Word was accomplished; hence it is that, although that work is from the whole Trinity, nevertheless *by appropriation* the Virgin is said to have conceived of the Holy Spirit[^p243-9].

Lastly, since it is from the first principle repairing in the *most complete* mode; hence it is that in the conception the due completeness was in the *offspring*, was in the *conceiving*, and was also in the *conceiving power*. Because the due completeness had to be in the *offspring*, hence it is that in the instant of the conception there was not only a severing of the seed, but also its consolidation, its configuration, its vivification through the soul and its deification through the Deity united to it; so that thus the Virgin truly conceived the Son of God on account of[^p244-1] the union of the flesh to the Deity, by the mediation of the rational spirit, through which, as through a middle of congruity, the flesh was fit for the union. — But because the due completeness had to be in the *conceiving*; since of the four modes three modes of producing man had gone before — the first neither from man nor from woman, as in Adam; the second from man without woman, as in Eve; the third from woman and man, as in all born in concupiscence — it befitted, for the completion of the universe, that a fourth mode be introduced, which namely should be from a woman without male seed, through the power of the highest worker[^p244-2]. — But because the due completeness had to be in the *power*; hence it is that in the conception of the Son of God there concurred at once *innate* power, *infused* power and *uncreated* power: the *innate* power prepared the matter, the *infused* power segregated it by purifying, the *uncreated* power *suddenly* perfected what could not come to be by created power except *successively*. And so the most blessed Virgin Mary was a mother in the most complete mode, conceiving the Son of God himself without a man, the Holy Spirit making her fruitful. For because in the mind of the Virgin the love of the Holy Spirit burned in a singular way; therefore in her flesh the power of the Holy Spirit worked marvels, by grace namely partly *arousing*, partly *aiding*, partly *elevating* nature, according to what that marvellous conception required.

---

la: Vide Luc. 1, 26. seqq. — Seq. sententia est ex August., Serm. 196. (alias 59. de Diversis) c. 1. n. 1. Cfr. Serm. 51. (alias 63. de Diversis), c. 11. n. 18. — De hoc cap. vide III. Sent. d. 3-5. — Superius pro *perficiendum* I M V *complendum*.

en: See Luke 1, 26 ff. — The sentence following is from Augustine, *Serm.* 196 (alias 59 *de Diversis*), c. 1, n. 1. Cf. *Serm.* 51 (alias 63 *de Diversis*), c. 11, n. 18. — On this chapter see III *Sent.*, d. 3–5. — Above, for *perficiendum* I M V have *complendum*.

la: Multi codd. non repetunt *decet eius* nec *operari*, quod etiam paulo post omittitur a pluribus codd. Superius ante *communissimo* et *completissimo* edd. et plures codd. repetunt *modo*.

en: Many codices do not repeat *decet eius* nor *operari*, which is likewise omitted a little further on by several codices. Above, before *communissimo* and *completissimo*, the editions and several codices repeat *modo*.

la: Vide supra p. III. c. 2-7. — Post *originale* 2 cum pluribus codd. addit *peccatum*, II legit *originalem culpam*.

en: See above, Pars III, capp. 2–7. — After *originale*, edition 2, with several codices, adds *peccatum*; II reads *originalem culpam*.

la: Secundum Gregor. Vide tom. IV. pag. 37, nota 4. — Inferius pro *concupiscibiliter* E I O P Q T U *concupiscentialiter*, et pro *sanitatem* K *salutem*.

en: According to Gregory. See tom. IV, p. 37, note 4. — Further below, for *concupiscibiliter* E I O P Q T U have *concupiscentialiter*, and for *sanitatem* K has *salutem*.

en: Cf. Colossians 1, 20. — See III *Sent.*, d. 2, dub. 4.

la: Diffusius explicatur hoc III. Sent. d. 4. a. 1. q. 1. — Pro *peracta* P *operata*.

en: This is explained more at length in III *Sent.*, d. 4, a. 1, q. 1. — For *peracta* P has *operata*.

la: Ita D E S, in aliis et edd. *per*. — De medio congruentiae vide III. Sent. d. 2. a. 3. q. 1.

en: So D E S; in the other codices and in the editions, *per*. — On the middle of congruity see III *Sent.*, d. 2, a. 3, q. 1.

la: Secundum Anselm., II. Cur Deus homo, c. 8; idem, verbis mutatis, invenitur in opusculo, cui titulus: Sermones ad fratres in eremo (inter opera August.), serm. 28. — Pro *concupiscibiliter* plures codd. *concupiscentialiter*. Paulo inferius post *in virtute* O P W addunt *concipiente*. Subinde multi codd. omittunt *beatissima*.

en: According to Anselm, II *Cur Deus homo*, c. 8; the same is found, with the words altered, in the little work entitled *Sermones ad fratres in eremo* (among the works of Augustine), serm. 28. — For *concupiscibiliter* several codices have *concupiscentialiter*. A little further below, after *in virtute* O P W add *concipiente*. Thereafter many codices omit *beatissima*. ---

translators_notes:
**★★ PAGE SPAN — pp. 243–244, OPENING MID-COLUMN AND CLOSING MID-COLUMN, BOTH ENDS FIXED POSITIVELY.** `Cap. III. / De incarnatione quantum ad modum.` stands **part-way down p. 243's LEFT column**, immediately below Cap. II's last line (`…contra regulam praehabitam propter causam praedictam.`), so the opening is fixed by Cap. II's close exactly as `bon-brev-p4-c2` recorded it, and there was **no incoming body-text seam to reconstruct**. Cap. III fills the rest of p. 243's left column to `…et virtutem, operari perfecte.`, crosses p. 243's gutter at a **PARAGRAPH boundary** (the *Ratio* paragraph closes at the foot of the left column and `Quoniam ergo incarnatio est a primo principio reparante modo congruentissimo…` opens the right column), fills the whole of p. 243's right column to `…debuit esse in prole, hinc est, quod in`, breaks across the leaf **at a word boundary, MID-CLAUSE** into the head of **p. 244's LEFT column** (`instanti conceptionis non tantum fuit seminis decisio…`), and closes **part-way down p. 244's left column** at `…iuxta quod conceptus ille mirabilis exigebat.` **★ The end is fixed POSITIVELY from the `Cap. IV. / De incarnatione quantum ad plenitudinem temporum.` heading standing immediately below it in the same left column** — p. 244 was extracted and banded for that purpose, and **Cap. III does not reach p. 244's gutter.** No inference from white space was drawn anywhere; in particular the tall blank below `…operari perfecte.` at the foot of p. 243's left column, which is the five-note left footer block expanding upward, was used as evidence for nothing.

**★ A THIRD BREAK SHAPE IN THREE LEAVES, AND THIS ONE IS THE *EASY* ONE — WHICH IS ITSELF THE WARNING.** p. 242's gutter broke mid-sentence at a word boundary, p. 242 → p. 243 broke mid-sentence at a word boundary, and here p. 243's **gutter falls exactly at a paragraph boundary** while the **leaf break falls inside a subordinate clause** (`…quod in` / `instanti conceptionis…`), which is the only one of the four that could not be mistaken for an ending. **The clean gutter break is not evidence that the capitulum ends at the gutter, and the ugly leaf break is not evidence that it continues** — the `Cap. IV.` heading is what settles it, and it is the only thing that does.

**★ THE PAGE MARKER SITS AT THE BODY'S END — the `bon-brev-p4-c1` limiting case, second occurrence.** The p. 243/244 break falls inside the capitulum's **last paragraph** (the *Postremo* period, which runs unbroken from p. 243's right column to the end of Cap. III on p. 244), so the nearest paragraph boundary **below** the break is the end of the body itself, and `<!-- page 244 -->` carries no text after it. **The consequence, the same one `bon-brev-p4-c2` recorded from the other side: p. 244's notes 1 and 2 anchor above the marker.** Do not move the marker up to the *Postremo* paragraph's head to make it look useful — that would put the whole of p. 243's *Postremo* text behind a p. 244 marker. **The page-qualified labels absorb it; the true break position is recorded here, as the convention requires.**

**Gutters.** **p. 243 = 1186**, carried over from `bon-brev-p4-c2`'s re-profiling (default 1180 on a 50 px run, six further windows 1183–1192) and **re-confirmed visually here on freshly cut bands** — at 1186 the left column's five-note footer block and the right column's `Quoniam ergo…` opening capitals both fall where they should, and all six of this chunk's p. 243 anchors read cleanly. **p. 244 was extracted and auto-measured FRESH, with no constant — and the default FAILED LOUDLY: `colcrop.py vol5 244` → `split_x=1346, low-ink run 10 px, ⚠ WEAK RUN`.** That is the p. 240 shape, not the p. 241/243 shape: **a flagged failure, not a quiet one.** Re-profiling shows why and where — the low body rows are choked (rows 45–92 %: 1346/10 px · rows 35–75 %: 1346/11 px · rows 50–85 %: 1346/10 px · rows 45–85 %: 1346/10 px · rows 50–92 %: 1346/10 px), while every window that reaches into the **upper** body rows returns a healthy run and a consistent value: rows 30–70 % **1368/59** · rows 40–65 % **1368/59** · rows 20–60 % **1367/60** · rows 25–55 % **1366/63** · rows 15–45 % **1366/62** · rows 12–40 % **1366/62** · rows 10–45 % **1366/62** · rows 55–80 % **1371/62**. **1367 was adopted** as the centre of that agreement and confirmed visually: at 1367 the left column is captured whole and the right column's opening letters stand clear. **The cause is p. 240's cause, and it is now confirmed as recurring: p. 244's marginal glosses (`Modi 4 producendi hominem.`, `Virtus triplex.`, `Post duplicem legem, post Patriarchas et Prophetas.`, `In fine temporum et plenitudine.`, `Ratio.`) sit low in the left column and the right column's glosses sit in the outer margin, so the low rows carry ink where the gutter ought to be blank.** When `colcrop` flags a weak run on a Vol V page, **move the window UP before assuming a display heading**. Series now 1194 · 1337 · 1211 · 1341 · 1210 · 1331 · 1209 · 1338 · 1200 · 1338 · 1228 · 1361 · **1186** · **1367**. p. 244's 1367 sits inside the even-page cluster's 1331–1361 band but **above all of it**, immediately after the lowest odd value ever recorded. **Parity remains spent. Measure every page; re-profile any run under ~60 px; and treat a flagged sub-15 px run as a failure outright.**

**Apparatus (8 entries), ownership from anchors on the bands.** This chunk owns **p. 243 nn. 4–9** and **p. 244 nn. 1–2**. Every anchor was read on the band at 450 dpi and **re-derived from scratch**; none was adopted from the hand-off, from raw anchor glyphs, or from which footer block holds a note.
- p. 243 n. **4** on `Spiritus sanctus in eam supervenit`⁴ — **left** column, in Cap. III's opening thesis, four lines below the `Cap. III.` heading.
- p. 243 n. **5** on `decet eius largitatem operari`⁵ — **left** column, on the last printed line of the column, inside the *Ratio*'s triple *decet*.
- p. 243 n. **6** on `transfundentem originale in prolem`⁶ — **RIGHT** column, closing the *cum genus humanum lapsum fuerit* protasis.
- p. 243 n. **7** on `« contraria contrariis curarentur`⁷ `»` — **right** column. **★ The marker stands INSIDE the guillemets, before the closing `»`**, the same placement p. 243 n. 3 carries one capitulum above and `bon-brev-p3-c10` recorded three times on p. 239. Rendered at that exact position in both languages.
- p. 243 n. **8** on `utpote caelestium et terrestrium`⁸ — **right** column, inside the em-dash parenthesis of the *Rursus* period.
- p. 243 n. **9** on `Virgo concepisse de Spiritu sancto`⁹ — **right** column, closing the *Rursus* period.
- p. 244 n. **1** on `vere conciperet propter`¹ — **left** column, inside the *Postremo* period's first member.
- p. 244 n. **2** on `per virtutem summi operatoris`² — **left** column, closing the *quatuor modi* member.

**★ THE HAND-OFF'S ANCHOR CLAIM WAS RE-DERIVED AND HELD — but only two of the six landed where the forwarded orientation implied.** `bon-brev-p4-c2` forwarded p. 243 nn. 4–9 as "all anchoring below the `Cap. III.` heading," which is true and is the only claim that governs ownership. **It said nothing about columns, and on the band the register divides 2 / 4 across the gutter: nn. 4–5 anchor in the LEFT column and nn. 6–9 in the RIGHT, while the footer blocks divide 5 / 4** (left block nn. 1–5, right block the tail of n. 5 plus nn. 6–9). **The block division and the anchor division therefore differ by one note in the same page** — p. 243 is simultaneously a split-inside-a-note page, a split-by-capitulum page, and a one-note anchor/block mismatch. This is `p4-c2`'s own lesson applied forward: a forwarded location is orientation, never evidence.

**★ A NINTH FOOTER SHAPE — p. 244's REGISTER IS SEVEN NOTES, SPLIT INSIDE n. 3, AND THE CAPITULUM BOUNDARY FALLS ONE NOTE ABOVE THE SPLIT.** p. 244's left block holds nn. **1–3** with n. 3 breaking off at a word boundary (`— Superius pro a principio [2 cum aliquot`) and its right block opens **UNNUMBERED** with `codd. a primo principio] Vat., 1 et 3 in principio, et pro saeculorum B temporum.` before carrying nn. **4–7**; but the *capitulum* boundary falls between nn. **2 and 3**, so this chunk takes only nn. 1–2 and forwards n. 3 whole together with the right block. That is the mirror of p. 243, where the boundary fell **two** notes above the block break. Adding to the catalogue: overrun (pp. 220, 221, 226, 233, 239) · underrun (pp. 234, 237) · coincidence (pp. 231, 232, 235, 240) · split-inside-a-note (pp. 236, 238, 240, 243, **244**) · both at once (p. 239) · split by PARS (p. 241) · split by CAPITULUM (pp. 242, 243, **244**) · **anchor split and block split differing by one note within a single page (p. 243)**. **The footer block's extent still tells you nothing about which column, or which unit, a note's anchor is in.**

**★ NEITHER p. 243 NOR p. 244 CARRIES THE PRINTER'S SIGNATURE OR A QUIRE SIGNATURE.** `S. Bonav. — Tom. V.` last fell on p. 241. **p. 243's register is nine entries (already in `KNOWN_TOTALS` and now closed by this chunk) and p. 244's is seven** — the latter band-derived here and newly fed to `check-vol5-apparatus.py`.

**Runover findings — ONE POSITIVE LOGGED, ONE NEGATIVE CLOSED FROM BOTH SIDES, ONE POSITIVE FORWARDED.**
- *Gutter-crossing within p. 243 — **POSITIVE**, and it is THIS chunk's to render and to log.* p. 243's left block breaks off inside **n. 5** at `…non repetunt decet eius nec operari, quod`, at a **WORD boundary but mid-clause after a comma**, and its right block opens **UNNUMBERED** with `etiam paulo post omittitur a pluribus codd. Superius ante com|munissimo et completissimo edd. et plures codd. repetunt modo.` before carrying nn. 6–9. **n. 5 is rendered joined above**, and the runover is logged on `p4-c3`'s ledger line, exactly as `bon-brev-p4-c2` directed (it deliberately did not log it, because n. 5 anchors in Cap. III). **Re-derived here from both sides on the bands, not adopted:** the left block's last line was read to its end and the right block's first line was read from its start, and the right block's first line carries **no numeral**.
- *Page-crossing, p. 243 → p. 244 — **NEGATIVE**, now CLOSED FROM BOTH SIDES.* `bon-brev-p4-c2` closed the p. 243 side (its right block ends complete at n. 9, `— Pro peracta P operata.`); **the p. 244 side is run here and agrees: p. 244's left footer block opens with a numbered entry** `¹` (`Ita D E S, in aliis et edd. per. …`), with no unnumbered fragment above it. **The body crosses this leaf and the footer does not — the third consecutive leaf on which the two behave independently.**
- *Gutter-crossing within p. 244 — **POSITIVE**, but NOT this chunk's to log or render.* p. 244's left block breaks off inside **n. 3** at `[2 cum aliquot` / `codd. a primo principio]`, at a **WORD boundary inside an editorial bracket** — a seventh distinct break position in seven leaves, and the first to fall inside a square-bracketed lemma. **n. 3 anchors on `iuxta quod dicit Apostolus³` in Cap. IV**, so by the standing rule the p. 244 gutter belongs to **`bon-brev-p4-c4`'s ledger line**. Recorded here so that chunk need not re-derive it, but **it must still read both sides for itself.**
- *The p. 242 → p. 243 page-crossing test was CLOSED NEGATIVE by `p4-c2` from both sides and is not re-logged here; `p4-c2` logs `p.242 n.4:gutter` and that is not re-logged either.*

**Digits and sigla settled off the bands** (450 dpi; p. 243's left and right footer blocks and p. 244's left block re-read under direct high-factor zoom). **★ Pars IV cites this same edition's Vols II, III and IV constantly, and every one of those digits is in the serif `1`/`4`, `3`/`5` confusion class. The controlling contrast on these two leaves is the flagged `1` (angled top flag, closed stem, no counter) against the true `4` (crossbar, open triangular counter), and both stand within a few words of each other in p. 243 nn. 8–9 — which is what makes them decidable at all.**
- **★ `Vide Luc. 1, 26. seqq.` (p. 243 n. 4) — the raw's `Luc. 1, 2C.` is right about the `1` by accident and the plate settles it by contrast.** The glyph after `Luc.` is the flagged upright, not the open-countered `4`; **and the sense is decisive: Luke 1, 26 ff. is the Annunciation, which is precisely what the sentence the note anchors on narrates.**
- **★ `Serm. 196. (alias 59. de Diversis) c. 1. n. 1.` (p. 243 n. 4) — five digits in eleven characters, four of them uprights.** `196` opens with the flagged `1`; `59` is the old-style flat-bar-and-bowl `5` beside a clean `9` (**the raw reads `39`, and it is wrong** — the bar is flat and the bowl closed, the `3`'s double bowl is absent, and the same `5` recurs three words later in `Serm. 51.`); `c. 1. n. 1.` is the flagged upright twice. **Augustine's *Serm.* 196 is a Nativity sermon and its c. 1 n. 1 is where the *virgo concepit / peperit / permansit* triad stands — the very sentence Bonaventure quotes inside guillemets.**
- **★ `Cfr. Serm. 51. (alias 63. de Diversis), c. 11. n. 18.` (p. 243 n. 4) — `51` not `54`.** The second glyph is the flagged upright, in direct contrast with the crossbarred `4` of `q. 4.` two entries above in the same block; the raw prints `51` and `03` and is right once. **Sense confirms both readings: *Serm.* 51 is Augustine's long sermon on the two genealogies, it runs to twenty-one numbered sections (so a `c. 11. n. 18.` exists, which it would not in a short sermon), and its c. 11 is on Mary's consent and virginity.**
- **`De hoc cap. vide III. Sent. d. 3-5.` (p. 243 n. 4)** — `III.` roman (the book, symmetric head-and-foot serifs), `3-5` both old-style digits, clean. **III *Sent.* dd. 3–5 are the Incarnation distinctions**, which is what a note on the *modus incarnationis* must point to.
- **★ `I M V` (p. 243 n. 4) — a run of CODEX sigla, so the upright is the roman `I`, not the edition `1`.** The hand-off named this trap and the band confirms it: the upright carries the roman's symmetric serifs and stands between two codex letters. **There is never an edition `1` inside a run of codex letters** — fifteenth leaf on which this split has had to be resolved.
- **★ `Vide supra p. III. c. 2-7.` (p. 243 n. 6) — `p. III.` is this work's PARS III, not a page.** It stands beside `supra` and beside a chapter number, Quaracchi's internal-reference form, exactly as `p. I.` did in p. 243 n. 1 and on p. 240. The raw prints `g. 2-7`; the band prints `c. 2-7.` clean. **Rendered in English as `Pars III, capp. 2–7` so the reference cannot be misread as a page.** Sense checks: Pars III's capitula 2–7 are its original-sin chapters, and the body clause the note anchors on is about *originale* transmitted into the offspring.
- **★ `2` vs `II` INSIDE ONE CLAUSE (p. 243 n. 6) — and the `II` is NOT the flattened `H`.** Under high zoom the mark is two separate uprights, each with full top and bottom serifs, with clear white between them and **no trace of a crossbar**; the contrast case is p. 244 n. 2's `Anselm., II. Cur Deus homo`, where on the *adjacent leaf* the same roman `II` prints with the crossbar and reads as `H`. **The plate is inconsistent within two facing pages of itself, exactly as the standing rule says.** Transcribed as `II` and left untranslated in the English, as codex and edition sigla always are: **what `II` designates is not settled by this page** — the entry's other witness is the arabic `2` (edition 2), and this apparatus does carry a genuine codex `H` elsewhere in the Breviloquium (pp. 220, 228) — **so the identification is deliberately not guessed at here.** The transcription is not in doubt; only the referent is, and a siglum is reproduced, not interpreted.
- **★ `Vide tom. IV. pag. 37, nota 4.` (p. 243 n. 7) — `nota 4.`, not `nota 1.`, and the raw's `nota l.` is illegible rather than wrong.** The glyph carries a crossbar and an open triangular counter and is the same sort as `dub. 4.` and `d. 4.` in nn. 8–9 below it, and visibly unlike the flagged `1`s of `a. 1. q. 1.` in the same three lines. `tom. IV.` is roman with a period; `pag. 37` reads clean (no upright to flag).
- **`E I O P Q T U` (p. 243 n. 7)** — a run of seven codex sigla; the second is the roman `I`, not an edition `1`, on the same rule as n. 4's `I M V`. `K` in the same entry reads clean.
- **★ `Cfr. Col. 1, 20. — Vide III. Sent. d. 2. dub. 4.` (p. 243 n. 8) — the flagged `1` and the crossbarred `4` in a single line, six words apart.** `Col. 1` is the flagged upright, `dub. 4.` the open-countered crossbar; the raw prints `Col. 1` right and `dub. i.` as noise. **Colossians 1, 20 is the reconciling of things *in caelis et in terra*, which is precisely the `caelestium et terrestrium` the note anchors on.**
- **★ `Diffusius explicatur hoc III. Sent. d. 4. a. 1. q. 1.` (p. 243 n. 9) — all three species in one citation.** `III.` roman (book), `d. 4.` the crossbarred digit, `a. 1. q. 1.` the flagged uprights; the raw flattens all four (`d. i. a. I. q. I.`). **Sense confirms it: III *Sent.* d. 4 a. 1 q. 1 asks whether the conception is to be attributed to the Holy Spirit — the exact claim of the sentence it anchors on.**
- **`Ita D E S, in aliis et edd. per.` and `III. Sent. d. 2. a. 3. q. 1.` (p. 244 n. 1)** — `D E S` a clean codex run; `d. 2. a. 3.` clean digits; `q. 1.` the flagged upright, contrasting inside the same footer block with `serm. 28.` in n. 2. **The variant is the body's own `propter` against `per` — which is why the anchor stands on `propter` and not at the clause's end.**
- **★ `Secundum Anselm., II. Cur Deus homo, c. 8` (p. 244 n. 2) — the `II`→`H` FLATTENING IN ITS PURE FORM, and the sense is what settles it.** The glyph prints with a visible crossbar and reads as `H`; but `H` is not a book number, and **Anselm's *Cur Deus homo* II, c. 8 is the chapter that enumerates the four modes of producing man — nec de viro nec de muliere / de viro sine muliere / de viro et muliere / de muliere sine viro — which is verbatim what the sentence the note anchors on argues.** Read `II.` **This is the same page-pair on which the roman `II` prints *without* a crossbar in p. 243 n. 6: the typeface is inconsistent across a single opening, and only the siglum set and the sense decide.**
- **`serm. 28.`, `O P W`, `c. 8` (p. 244 n. 2)** — all read clean; no upright to flag in any of them, and no edition digit inside the codex run.

**Preserved as printed, not harmonised.**
- **`Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia` carries the COLON — SIXTH consecutive attestation** (Pars III capp. IX–XI, Pars IV capp. I–III), and the one `bon-brev-p4-c2` sighted on this page and forwarded. p. 237's full stop remains the one-off.
- **The em-dash articulation is asymmetric again, and in a new way.** ` — ` stands before `Concepit autem` in the opening thesis and **three times** inside the closing *Postremo* period (before each `Quia vero completio debita debuit esse in…` member), and it brackets the parenthesis in the *Rursus* period (`— nam per Verbum incarnatum … utrumque sexum —`); but **it does not stand before `Quoniam ergo`, `Rursus` or `Postremo`, which open paragraphs bare.** So in this capitulum the dash marks *sub*-members and never paragraph heads — the reverse of Cap. II's distribution one leaf earlier. **Transcribed, never regularised.**
- **The italics are selective and were set exactly as printed.** `modo` and `mater Dei` are italic in the opening paragraph while `Verbo unitam`, `sanctam et immaculatam` and `Virgo` are roman; the *Ratio*'s `congruentissimo, communissimo et completissimo` are italic but the governing `modo` before them is roman; `sapientiam / largitatem / virtutem` and `congrue / communiter / perfecte` are italic while the three `operari` between them are roman; in the *Rursus* period `Angeli, mulieris, viri, Angelus Gabriel, Virgo immaculata, proles concepta` are italic but `Patris aeterni`, `templum Spiritus sancti` and `persona Verbi` are roman; and in the *Postremo* period `prole / conceptu / virtute concipiente / virtute`, the three `virtus` epithets `innata / infusa / increata`, `subito`, `successive` and `excitante / adiuvante / elevante` are italic while `virtus` itself, `materiam`, `gratia` and `naturam` are roman. **Quaracchi italicise a term where it is functioning as a member of a division, not wherever it recurs** — the same rule Cap. II printed.
- **`concupiscibiliter` (twice in the body) is set roman and is the reading the apparatus defends against `concupiscentialiter`** (p. 243 n. 7, p. 244 n. 2), while `generationem concupiscentialem` in the same right column is italic and is *not* the same word. **Not harmonised in either direction.**
- **`transfundentem originale in prolem`** — `originale` stands alone, without `peccatum`, which is exactly the reading p. 243 n. 6 records the editions and codices supplementing. **The English supplies `[taint]` in square brackets to mark the ellipsis; the Latin is left as printed.**
- **`viri vero ut conceptae prolis`** has no participle where the two preceding members have one (`denuntiantis`, `concipientis`), so the English supplies **`[the father]`** in square brackets. **The Latin is unambiguous and the supply is grammatical, not conjectural** — this is not a `[?]`.

**Enumerations preserved exactly.** The **three** things in which the incarnation is reparative — *congruentissimo, communissimo, completissimo* — announced in the *Ratio*, mapped one-to-one onto the three *decet* clauses (*sapientia/congrue*, *largitas/communiter*, *virtus/perfecte*), and then developed **in that order** by the *Quoniam ergo* / *Rursus* / *Postremo* paragraphs; the **three** concurring at the mystery (*Angelus, mulier, vir*) and the **three** hierarchies (divina, angelica, humana) they answer to; the **three** members of the due completeness (*in prole, in conceptu, in virtute concipiente*), taken up in that same order by the three *Quia vero* members of the closing period; the **four** modes of producing man, three past and the fourth introduced *ad complementum universi*; and the **three** concurring powers (*innata, infusa, increata*) with their three works, and the **three** modes of the grace at work in the Virgin's flesh (*excitante, adiuvante, elevante*).

**Marginalia** (Quaracchi editorial side-glosses, trimmed from the body per corpus convention; logged here in body order). p. 243 L — "Thesis 1." · "Thesis 2." · "Triplex modus." p. 243 R — "Pro 1. thesi arguitur ex congruentissimo modo." · "Item, ex communissimo." · "Pro thesi 2. arguitur ex modo completissimo tripliciter." p. 244 L — "Modi 4 producendi hominem." · "Virtus triplex." **★ The editors' own numbering is internally inconsistent here: the first right-column gloss prints `Pro 1. thesi` with the number BEFORE the noun, and the third prints `Pro thesi 2.` with it after — within a single column, and one leaf after Cap. II ran `Pro thesi 1–5.` uniformly.** Eight glosses across a capitulum of five paragraphs, and the thesis/answer pairing of Cap. II holds: two theses stated in the left column, two answered in the right. **It agrees with the `Cap. IV.` heading about where Cap. III ends; it was not used to set the boundary.**

**No `[?]` flags.**

**Raw-quality verdict, per page AND per region.**
- **p. 243, left column, Cap. III's opening + the *Ratio* — FAIR, and materially the same grade `bon-brev-p4-c2` gave the top of this column.** The `Cap. III.` heading survives intact; the display subtitle garbles one word (`quaiUuin` for *quantum*). Body garbles are scattered and single-letter, with the plate's `h` reading as `b` and `e` as `c` throughout: `Angclo nuntiantc`, `Mariac mystcrium`, `perficicndum`, `appctiit ct conscnsit`, `supcrvc-nit*`, `qucm Virgo pcperit`, `autcm`, `carncm`, `Verbo uniUxm` (the worst word in the run), `cst dulcissima`, `communiisimo cl completis.nmo`, `Dccet`, `.sapieiUiam operari conifrue`, `largitatem.` (a stray full stop the plate does not print), `opcrari perfecle`. **Fifteen garbles in eighteen printed lines**, none of them a whole word lost. **The raw also shatters the marginal glosses to `iis !.`, `iis 2.` and `mo-` — the plate prints `Thesis 1.`, `Thesis 2.` and `Triplex modus.`** — a further instance of the standing rule that the raw's glosses are no more trustworthy than its digits.
- **p. 243, right column — GOOD, and the cleanest full column this chunk sets from; a clear step UP from the same page's left column.** `pinno prmcipio`, `reparanle`, `conqruenlissimo`, `cX congruus` (for `et congruus` — the worst single token in the run), `medicma ex op|wsito respondcat`, `rcparatio`, `rcmedium nocuinento`, `diaholicam`, `comen.sum`, `concupisccntialem`, `oportnit, qufxl`, `cssct`, `siiadens`, `cl Virgo`, `consenticns`, `*anc/«` (for `sancti`), `fccundans`, `pcr dia-bolum decepla`, `virnm concupiscibilitcr cognila`, `ctcorrupta` (words run together), `gcncra-ret`, `darct`, `vitim` (for `vitam`), `principiouoni.cxcom.` (the gloss `Item, ex communissimo.` fused onto the body line), `\'crbum`, `incarnalam`, `angeloram`, `cacleslium ct lerrcstrium`, `p.sus`, `fiiit`, `concnr-sus`, `iit`, `conccptae`, `&\c`, `es»el`, `acterni`, `immacukUa`, `tem-pium`, `omniuin`, `dc triplici`, `insinaandam`, `Dci`, `ctiain`, `gcneralilatem`, `qiioniam liberalitas`, `liinc est`, `illiid`. **Forty-five garbles in forty-two printed lines — roughly one per line, against p. 243's left column's five-sixths and p. 242's right column's two-thirds.** Nothing dropped; every garble single-letter or single-syllable.
- **p. 243 footer, nn. 4–9 — FLATTENED, and the numeric citations are again the worst of it.** `Vide Luc. 1, 2C. seciq.`, `scitentin est cx Adgust.`, **`Serm. 196. (alias 39. do Diversis)`** (for `alias 59.` — **the substantive error in this register**), `ClV. Serm. 51.`, `(dlias 03. ilc Diveisis)`, `c. 1 1 . n. 18.`, `vitlc`, `Siiperius |)ro perficicnibmi I M V complmdum`, `rcpenint decet eius ncc operuri, (|iiod`, `oniittilur a pliiribiis codd.`, `Supcriiis anlc com muimnimo et completis.nmo cdd.`, **`Vide supra p. III. g. 2-7.`** (for `c. 2-7.`), `origimle 2 ciim- plii-ribiis codd.`, `oriijinalem culpam`, **`nota l.`** (for `nota 4.` — illegible rather than wrong), `concupiscibilil&`, `sanitatcm`, **`dub. i.`** (for `dub. 4.`), `DifTusius cxplicatur`, **`d. i. a. I.q. I.`** (for `d. 4. a. 1. q. 1.` — all four flattened, and the two species reversed in the same four words). **The raw gets `Col. 1, 20.`, `d. 2.` and `d. 3-5.` right, which is not a reason to have trusted them; every digit in the register was settled on the band.**
- **p. 244, left column, Cap. III's tail — FAIR to POOR, and the WEAKEST run this chunk sets from.** `instaiili conceplionis`, `veruin etiam`, `aninium` (for *animam*), `Dei Filiiim`, `unionein carnis`, `spirilu ratiomili`, `per inedium congruentiae`, `compietio debita`, `esse in conceplu`, `ex quatuor niodis`, `producendi iiominem`, `pnmus nec de viro nec muliere`, `sicut in ,\dam`, `terlius`, `in oninibus`, `modum inlrodiici`, `coini)letio de-bita`, **`in vlrtuk`** (for *in virtute* — the worst token in the run), `liinc est`, **`virtus «mato`** (for *virtus innata*), `virtus increala`, `virtus innula`, `infiisa`, `increala subilo`, `virtute creatii nisi successioe`, `bealissima`, `inater fuit`, `ipauin Dei Filium`, `in mente Xirginis ainor`, `partini cxcilanlc`, **`partim «w/rayajite`** (for *partim adiuvante* — the worst cluster on the page), `partim efeyante`, `iuxtii quod conceplus ille mirabilis exigebat`. **Thirty-three garbles in twenty-six printed lines — about one and a quarter per line, worse than p. 243's right column and comparable to p. 243's left.** The raw also shatters both marginal glosses (`Mnrii 4 |iro-duicTidi ho-miuciu.` for `Modi 4 producendi hominem.`; `viriiis iri-tilcx` for `Virtus triplex.`) and prints the page marker as `;244`.
- **★ p. 244's `Cap. IV.` HEADING IS THE FIRST BREVILOQUIUM CHAPTER HEADING IN FIVE LEAVES THAT THE RAW *DOES* SHATTER — and this chunk's whole boundary rests on it.** The raw gives **`Cah. IV.`** and the display subtitle as `De incarnaiwne quanlum ad plenitudinem lcmporum.`; on the band both print clean. **The boundary was set from the band, as it always must be, but this is the concrete case the standing rule exists for: had the heading been read off the raw, `Cah.` is exactly the sort of token a reader dismisses as noise.**
- **p. 244 footer, nn. 1–2 (the two owned here) — FLATTENED but short and legible.** `Ila D E S`, `edd. per.`, `De medio congruculiae vide III. Sent. d. 2. a. 3. q. 1.`, `Secundum Anselm.,, H. Cur Deus homo, c. 8` (**the `II` flattened to `H` — the trap, and the raw reproduces the plate's own ambiguity rather than resolving it**), `verbis mutatis, invenitur in opusculo`, `serm. 28.`, `plures codd. concupiscentialiter`, `O P W addunt concipiente`, `omittunt beatissima`. **The raw's digits happen to be right in both entries — and each was still settled on the band.**

**Hand-offs.**
- *Picked up from `bon-brev-p4-c2`:* **p. 243 footer notes 4–9 — SIX entries, closing p. 243's register.** Every anchor was re-derived on the band, and **the ownership claim held for all six** (all anchor below the `Cap. III.` heading); **the hand-off made no column claim, and the band shows the register splits 2 / 4 across the gutter against a 5 / 4 block split** — recorded above. **Every digit and siglum was re-read at 450 dpi rather than adopted from the hand-off's orientation text**, and one raw reading is corrected against the plate: n. 4's `alias 59.` (raw `alias 39.`), settled from the glyph and then independently from sense. The hand-off's other structural claims all held: Cap. III opens part-way down p. 243's left column with `De modo incarnationis hoc tenendum est…` and no incoming seam; Cap. III runs past p. 243, whose right column ends mid-clause at `…hinc est, quod in`; p. 243's register is nine entries; p. 243's gutter runover is positive, at a word boundary inside n. 5, and is rendered joined and logged here; p. 243's gutter is 1186 and not the default 1180. **The forwarded `Ratio … haec est: quia` colon sighting also held.**
- *Forwarded to `bon-brev-p4-c4` (Pars IV, Cap. IV, *De incarnatione quantum ad plenitudinem temporum*):* **p. 244 footer notes 3–7 — FIVE entries, all of them Cap. IV's.** Anchors verified on the band as falling below the `Cap. IV.` heading; **n. 3 anchors on `iuxta quod dicit Apostolus³` in the Galatians quotation, in p. 244's LEFT column** — the only one of the five whose position was read here, so **the other four are ownership claims only and their locations must be re-derived.** **★ p. 244's own GUTTER RUNOVER IS POSITIVE and is `p4-c4`'s to render and to log** — the left block breaks off inside **n. 3** at `— Superius pro a principio [2 cum aliquot` and the right block opens UNNUMBERED with `codd. a primo principio] Vat., 1 et 3 in principio, et pro saeculorum B temporum.` before carrying nn. 4–7; **n. 3 must be rendered joined**, and note that the break falls **inside a square-bracketed lemma**, the first of its kind. **The p. 243 → p. 244 page-crossing test is CLOSED NEGATIVE from both sides here and must not be re-logged. The p. 244 → p. 245 test is still open** (p. 244's right block closes complete at n. 7, `Cfr. tom. II. pag. 330, nota 5. in fine.`, so it is negative from the p. 244 side, but p. 245 has not been read).
- *Recorded for `bon-brev-p4-c4`, from bands read here but not owned here:* **Cap. IV opens part-way down p. 244's LEFT column** under `Cap. IV. / De incarnatione quantum ad plenitudinem temporum.`, with `De tempore vero incarnationis hoc tenendum est, quod licet Deus a principio potuerit incarnari, noluit tamen nisi in fine saeculorum…` — **no incoming body-text seam to reconstruct.** It crosses p. 244's gutter and **runs past p. 244's foot: the right column ends MID-WORD at `…in quo primum principium coniun`**, so **p. 245 must be extracted and auto-measured FRESH and Cap. IV's end fixed positively from the `Cap. V.` heading there.** **p. 244's bands exist; its gutter is 1367 — adopted after re-profiling, NOT the default 1346, which FAILED with a flagged 10 px run because the low body rows carry marginal-gloss ink. p. 244's seven-note register IS band-read and IS newly in `KNOWN_TOTALS` (244: 7).**


site: bonaventure

collection: Breviloquium

title: Pars 4, Cap. 4

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 244 -->

### Capitulum IV. *De incarnatione quantum ad plenitudinem temporum.*

De *tempore* vero incarnationis hoc tenendum est, quod licet Deus a principio potuerit incarnari, noluit tamen nisi in fine saeculorum, praecedente lege naturae et lege figurae, post Patriarchas et Prophetas, quibus et per quos fuit incarnatio repromissa. — Post quos incarnari dignatus est tanquam in *fine temporum* et *plenitudine*, iuxta quod dicit Apostolus[^p244-3]: *At ubi venit plenitudo temporis, misit Deus Filium suum, factum ex muliere, factum sub Lege, ut eos qui sub Lege erant, redimeret.*

Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia incarnatio est opus primi principii reparantis, iuxta quod decet et convenit secundum *libertatem arbitrii*, secundum *sublimitatem remedii* et secundum *integritatem universi*; nam sapientissimus Artifex in agendo omnia haec attendit. — Quoniam ergo *libertas arbitrii* hoc requirit, ut ad nihil trahatur invita; sic debuit Deus genus humanum reparare, ut salutem inveniret qui vellet quaerere Salvatorem, qui vero nollet Salvatorem quaerere nec salutem per consequens inveniret. Nullus autem quaerit *medicum*, nisi recognoscat morbum[^p244-4]; nullus quaerit *doctorem*, nisi recognoscat se ignorantem; nullus quaerit *adiutorem*, nisi recognoscat se impotentem. Quia igitur homo in principio sui lapsus adhuc superbiebat de *scientia* et *virtute*; ideo praemisit Deus tempus legis naturae, in quo convinceretur de *ignorantia*; et post, cognita ignorantia, sed permanente *superbia de virtute*, qua dicebant: non deest qui faciat, sed deest qui iubeat; addidit legem praeceptis moralibus erudientem et caeremonialibus aggravantem; ut *habita scientia*, et *cognita impotentia*, confugeret homo ad divinam misericordiam et gratiam postulandam, quae data est nobis in adventu Christi. Ideo post legem naturae et Scripturae subsequi debuit incarnatio Verbi[^p244-5].

Rursus, quoniam *sublimitas remedii* requirit, ut *credatur* fide firmissima et *ametur* caritate ardentissima tanquam mysterium secretissimum et saluberrimum; ideo congruentissimum fuit, ut ante Christi adventum praeirent multa *testimonia* Prophetarum, tam explicita in verbis quam implicita in figuris, ut multis et firmis testimoniis quod erat secretum fieret certum et indubitabile ad credendum; praeirent etiam multiplicia *promissa* et ardentissima *desideria*, ut promissum beneficium exspectaretur, exspectatum differretur, dilatum amplius desideraretur, et diu desideratum ferventius amaretur et gratiosius susciperetur et sollicitius servaretur[^p244-6].

Postremo, quoniam *integritas et perfectio universi* requirit, ut universa sint ordinata quantum ad loca et tempora; et hoc opus incarnationis erat perfectissimum inter omnia opera divina; et processus debet esse ab imperfecto ad perfectum, et non e converso[^p244-7]: hinc est, quod opus illud debuit fieri in *fine temporum*, ut, sicut primus homo, qui erat totius mundi sensibilis ornamentum, ultimo fuerat conditus, scilicet sexto die, ad totius mundi completionem: sic secundus homo, totius mundi reparati complementum, in quo primum principium coniungitur cum ultimo, scilicet « Deus cum limo[^p245-1] », fieret in fine temporum, hoc est in sexta aetate, quae est aetas apta ad exercitium sapientiae et ad enervationem concupiscentiae et ad transitum a statu turbinis ad quietem; quae omnia competunt sextae aetati decursus mundi propter incarnationem Filii Dei.

<!-- page 245 -->

Quoniam ergo adventus Christi fuit in tempore legis *gratiae* et in *exhibitione misericordiae repromissae* et in *principio aetatis sextae*; et haec omnia dicunt plenitudinem; quia lex *gratiae* implet legem Scripturae, et *solutio promissi* implet promissionem, et *sexta aetas* ratione perfectionis senarii[^p245-2] sonat in plenitudinem: hinc est, quod in adventu Filii Dei dicitur esse *plenitudo temporum*, non propter hoc, quod in eius adventu tempus finiatur, sed quia temporalia mysteria impleantur. Sicut autem Christus non debuit venire in *principio temporis*, quia adventus eius nimis fuisset festinus; sic nec debuit[^p245-3] differre usque in *finem ultimum*, quia tunc nimium esset tardus. Decebat enim *salvatorem* inter tempus *morbi* et tempus *iudicii* in medio introducere tempus *remedii*. Decebat *mediatorem* quaedam suorum membrorum praecedere, quaedam sequi. Decebat *ductorem* perfectum tunc se ostendere, cum esset opportunitas currendi ad bravium; et hoc est in fine temporum et citra terminum et in approximatione ad finale iudicium; ut, per timorem iudicii stimulati et per spem praemii attracti et per perfectionem exempli animati, vigorose et perfecte sequamur ducem *de virtute in virtutem*, usque quo perveniamus *ad bravium felicitatis aeternae*[^p245-4].

---

english:
### Chapter IV. *On the incarnation as regards the fullness of times.*

Concerning the *time* of the incarnation this is to be held: that although God could have become incarnate from the beginning, he nevertheless willed it only at the end of the ages, the law of nature and the law of figure going before, after the Patriarchs and the Prophets, to whom and through whom the incarnation was promised. — After them he deigned to become incarnate as at the *end of the times* and in their *fullness*, according to what the Apostle says[^p244-3]: *But when the fullness of time came, God sent his Son, made of a woman, made under the Law, that he might redeem those who were under the Law.*

Now the reason for the understanding of the foresaid is this: since the incarnation is a work of the first principle repairing, according to what befits and accords with the *freedom of choice*, with the *sublimity of the remedy* and with the *integrity of the universe*; for the most wise Artificer attends to all these things in acting. — Since therefore *freedom of choice* requires this, that it be drawn to nothing unwilling; so God had to repair the human race in such a way that he should find salvation who was willing to seek the Savior, whereas he who was unwilling to seek the Savior would consequently not find salvation either. But no one seeks a *physician* unless he recognizes his disease[^p244-4]; no one seeks a *teacher* unless he recognizes himself ignorant; no one seeks a *helper* unless he recognizes himself powerless. Because therefore man, at the beginning of his fall, was still proud about *knowledge* and *power*; therefore God sent before the time of the law of nature, in which he might be convicted of *ignorance*; and afterward, his ignorance being known but the *pride about power* remaining, by which they were saying: there is no lack of one to do it, but there is a lack of one to command it; he added the law instructing by moral precepts and burdening by ceremonial ones; so that, *knowledge being had* and *powerlessness being known*, man might flee for refuge to the divine mercy and to the asking of grace, which has been given to us in the coming of Christ. Therefore after the law of nature and of Scripture the incarnation of the Word had to follow[^p244-5].

Again, since the *sublimity of the remedy* requires that it *be believed* with a most firm faith and *be loved* with a most ardent charity, as a mystery most secret and most salutary; therefore it was most fitting that before Christ's coming there should go before many *testimonies* of the Prophets, as much explicit in words as implicit in figures, so that by many and firm testimonies what was secret should become certain and indubitable for believing; there should also go before manifold *promises* and most ardent *desires*, so that the promised benefit might be awaited, the awaited deferred, the deferred more amply desired, and the long desired more fervently loved and more graciously received and more solicitously kept[^p244-6].

Lastly, since the *integrity and perfection of the universe* requires that all things be ordered as regards places and times; and this work of the incarnation was the most perfect among all the divine works; and the process ought to be from the imperfect to the perfect, and not the other way round[^p244-7]: hence it is that that work had to be done at the *end of the times*, so that, as the first man, who was the ornament of the whole sensible world, had been founded last, namely on the sixth day, for the completion of the whole world: so the second man, the complement of the whole repaired world, in whom the first principle is joined with the last, namely « God with clay[^p245-1] », should come to be at the end of the times, that is in the sixth age, which is the age apt for the exercise of wisdom and for the enervating of concupiscence and for the passage from the state of the whirlwind to rest; all of which things befit the sixth age of the world's course on account of the incarnation of the Son of God.

Since therefore the coming of Christ was in the time of the law of *grace* and in the *showing forth of the promised mercy* and in the *beginning of the sixth age*; and all these things bespeak fullness; because the law of *grace* fulfills the law of Scripture, and the *paying of what was promised* fulfills the promise, and the *sixth age*, by reason of the perfection of the senary[^p245-2], sounds of fullness: hence it is that in the coming of the Son of God there is said to be a *fullness of times*, not on this account, that in his coming time is ended, but because the temporal mysteries are fulfilled. But just as Christ ought not to have come at the *beginning of time*, because his coming would have been too hasty; so neither ought he[^p245-3] to have deferred it to the *last end*, because then he would have been too tardy. For it befitted the *savior* to introduce in the middle, between the time of *disease* and the time of *judgment*, the time of *remedy*. It befitted the *mediator* that some of his members should go before, some follow. It befitted the perfect *leader* to show himself at the time when there was opportunity of running for the prize; and this is at the end of the times and short of the term and in the approach to the final judgment; so that, goaded by the fear of judgment and drawn by the hope of the reward and animated by the perfection of the example, we might vigorously and perfectly follow our leader *from virtue to virtue*, until we come *to the prize of eternal happiness*[^p245-4].

---

la: Gal. 4, 4. seq. — Vide de hoc cap. III. Sent. d. 1. a. 2. q. 4. et dub. 1. — Superius pro *a principio* [2 cum aliquot codd. *a primo principio*] Vat., 1 et 3 *in principio*, et pro *saeculorum* B *temporum*.

en: Galatians 4, 4 ff. — On this chapter see III *Sent.*, d. 1, a. 2, q. 4 and dub. 1. — Above, for *a principio* [edition 2, with several codices, *a primo principio*] the Vatican edition and 1 and 3 have *in principio*, and for *saeculorum* B has *temporum*.

la: Pro *morbum* 1 *se aegrotantem*.

en: For *morbum*, edition 1 has *se aegrotantem*.

la: Secundum Hug. a S. Vict.; cfr. IV. Sent. d. 1. p. I. q. 5. fundam. 1. — Superius pro *dicebant* non pauci codd. et 2 *dicebat* (homo), et pro *non deest… sed deest* A G M N T *non deesse… sed deesse*.

en: According to Hugh of St. Victor; cf. IV *Sent.*, d. 1, p. I, q. 5, fundam. 1. — Above, for *dicebant* not a few codices and edition 2 have *dicebat* (homo), and for *non deest… sed deest* A G M N T have *non deesse… sed deesse*.

la: Vat., 1 et 3 *et amatum gratiosius susciperetur et susceptum sollicitius servaretur*.

en: The Vatican edition and 1 and 3 read *et amatum gratiosius susciperetur et susceptum sollicitius servaretur*.

en: Cf. tom. II, p. 330, note 5, at the end.

la: Secundum Bernard., Serm. 3. in Vigilia Nativit. Domini, n. 8. — Superius respicitur I. Cor. 15, 47: *Primus homo de terra, terrenus; secundus homo de caelo, caelestis*. — De *sexta aetate* cfr. supra Prolog. § 2. — Inferius pro *turbinis* F G H N P *tribulationis*, O *laboris*, 1 *de labore a statu turbinis*.

en: According to Bernard, *Serm.* 3 on the Vigil of the Nativity of the Lord, n. 8. — Above, 1 Corinthians 15, 47 is looked back to: *The first man was of the earth, earthy; the second man from heaven, heavenly*. — On the *sixth age* cf. above, Prologue § 2. — Further below, for *turbinis* F G H N P have *tribulationis*, O *laboris*, edition 1 *de labore a statu turbinis*.

la: Vide I. Sent. d. 2. q. 4. scholion. — Superius pro *misericordiae* D F H N *gratiae*.

en: See I *Sent.*, d. 2, q. 4, the scholion. — Above, for *misericordiae* D F H N have *gratiae*.

la: In codd. et 2 omittitur *debuit*. Inferius fide plurimorum codd. et 2 supplevimus *in medio*, pro quo B F *ut in medio*; G N legunt *ut in medio introduceret*; 1, post *salvatorem* addito *venire*, legit: *ut in medio introduceretur*.

en: In the codices and in edition 2 *debuit* is omitted. Further below, on the faith of very many codices and of edition 2 we have supplied *in medio*, for which B F have *ut in medio*; G N read *ut in medio introduceret*; edition 1, having added *venire* after *salvatorem*, reads: *ut in medio introduceretur*.

la: Psalm. 83, 8. — Phil. 3, 14: *Ad destinatum persequor ad bravium supernae vocationis Dei in Christo Iesu*. — Pro *usque quo* E *quousque*. Superius pro *citra* non pauci codd. et 2 *inter*.

en: Psalm 83, 8. — Philippians 3, 14: *I press on toward the goal, to the prize of the heavenly calling of God in Christ Jesus*. — For *usque quo* E has *quousque*. Above, for *citra* not a few codices and edition 2 have *inter*. ---

translators_notes:
**★★ PAGE SPAN — pp. 244–245, OPENING MID-COLUMN AND CLOSING MID-COLUMN, BOTH ENDS FIXED POSITIVELY.** `Cap. IV. / De incarnatione quantum ad plenitudinem temporum.` stands **part-way down p. 244's LEFT column**, immediately below Cap. III's last line (`…iuxta quod conceptus ille mirabilis exigebat.`), so the opening is fixed by Cap. III's close exactly as `bon-brev-p4-c3` recorded it, and there was **no incoming body-text seam to reconstruct**. Cap. IV fills the rest of p. 244's left column to `…iuxta quod decet et convenit secundum liberta-`, crosses p. 244's gutter **MID-WORD** (`liberta-` / `tem arbitrii`), fills the whole of p. 244's right column to `…in quo primum principium coniun`, breaks across the leaf **MID-WORD again** (`coniun` / `gitur cum ultimo`) into the head of **p. 245's LEFT column**, and closes **part-way down p. 245's left column** at `…usque quo perveniamus ad bravium felicitatis aeternae⁴.` **★ The end is fixed POSITIVELY from the `Cap. V. / De plenitudine gratiae Christi quantum ad charismata in affectu.` heading standing immediately below it in the same left column** — p. 245 was extracted and banded for that purpose, and **Cap. IV does not reach p. 245's gutter.** The tall blank below the `Postquam innotuit…` opening of Cap. V at the foot of p. 245's left column is the four-note left footer block expanding upward and was used as evidence for nothing.

**★★ AN EIGHTH BREAK SHAPE, AND THE FIRST LEAF WHOSE GUTTER AND PAGE BREAK ARE BOTH MID-WORD.** p. 244's gutter splits `libertatem` and the p. 244/245 leaf break splits `coniungitur` — two mid-word breaks in a single capitulum, the first time in Pars IV that both of a chunk's body breaks have fallen inside a word. Neither could be mistaken for an ending, which is precisely the trap that the standing rule warns about from the other direction: **the shape of the break carries no information about whether the unit continues.** The `Cap. V.` heading is what settles it, and it is the only thing that does.

**★ THE PAGE MARKER SITS AT THE NEAREST PARAGRAPH BOUNDARY BELOW THE BREAK — `bon-brev-p4-c1`'s limiting case AGAIN, third occurrence, and again with new-page anchors ABOVE the marker.** The p. 244/245 break falls inside the *Postremo* paragraph, which runs unbroken from p. 244's right column across the leaf and closes on p. 245 at `…propter incarnationem Filii Dei.` The nearest paragraph boundary **below** the break is therefore that paragraph's end, and `<!-- page 245 -->` sits there — with **p. 245's note 1 (`« Deus cum limo¹ »`) anchoring ABOVE the marker.** Do not move the marker up to the *Postremo* paragraph's head; that would put the whole of p. 244's right column behind a p. 245 marker. **The page-qualified labels absorb it; the true break position is recorded here.**

**Gutters.** **p. 244 = 1367**, carried from `bon-brev-p4-c3`'s re-profiling (default **1346 on a flagged 10 px run — a LOUD failure**; eight upper-row windows 1366–1371 on 59–63 px runs) and **re-confirmed visually here on freshly cut bands**: at 1367 the left column is captured whole, the `Cap. IV.` display heading is centred, and all five of this chunk's p. 244 anchors read cleanly. **p. 245 was extracted and auto-measured FRESH, with no constant.** `colcrop.py vol5 245` returned **`split_x=1206, low-ink run 56 px`, UNFLAGGED — but 56 px is under the ~60 px this volume gives on a sound measurement, so it was re-profiled**, exactly as the standing rule requires after p. 241 (default 1218/39 px, unflagged, 10 px wrong) and p. 243 (default 1180/50 px, unflagged, 6 px wrong). Fourteen row windows: rows 45–92 % **1206/56** · 50–85 % **1206/56** · 50–92 % **1206/56** · 55–80 % **1205/62** · 15–85 % **1203/49** · 35–75 % **1201/54** · 20–80 % **1201/54** · 30–70 % **1200/56** · 40–65 % **1200/56** · 20–60 % **1199/59** · 25–55 % **1198/61** · 15–45 % **1197/61** · 10–45 % **1197/61** · 12–40 % **1196/63**. The whole spread is **10 px (1196–1206)** and the widest runs (61–63 px) sit at the low end; **1201 was adopted** as the centre of that agreement and confirmed visually — at 1201 p. 245's left column is captured whole with the right column's opening letters standing clear, and the `Cap. V.` heading is centred in the band. **This is the QUIET version of the p. 244 failure, not a repeat of it: p. 245's marginal glosses are sparse (one in the left column) and do not choke the gutter, so the low rows lose only a few pixels rather than forty.** Series now 1194 · 1337 · 1211 · 1341 · 1210 · 1331 · 1209 · 1338 · 1200 · 1338 · 1228 · 1361 · 1186 · **1367** · **1201**. p. 245's 1201 sits inside the odd-page band (1186–1228) but **is the third different odd value in three odd leaves**. **Parity remains spent. Measure every page; re-profile any run under ~60 px even when unflagged; treat a flagged sub-15 px run as a failure outright.**

**Apparatus (9 entries), ownership from anchors on the bands.** This chunk owns **p. 244 nn. 3–7** and **p. 245 nn. 1–4**. Every anchor was read on the band at 450 dpi and **re-derived from scratch**; none was adopted from the hand-off, from raw anchor glyphs, or from which footer block holds a note.
- p. 244 n. **3** on `iuxta quod dicit Apostolus`³ — **left** column, at the colon introducing the Galatians quotation, seven lines below the `Cap. IV.` heading. (The one location `p4-c3` had personally verified; it holds.)
- p. 244 n. **4** on `nisi recognoscat morbum`⁴ — **RIGHT** column, in the first of the three *nullus quaerit* members.
- p. 244 n. **5** on `subsequi debuit incarnatio Verbi`⁵ — **right** column, closing the *libertas arbitrii* member.
- p. 244 n. **6** on `et sollicitius servaretur`⁶ — **right** column, closing the *Rursus* period.
- p. 244 n. **7** on `et non e converso`⁷ — **right** column, inside the *Postremo* period, before its colon.
- p. 245 n. **1** on `« Deus cum limo`¹ `»` — **left** column. **★ The marker stands INSIDE the guillemets, before the closing `»`** — the same placement p. 243 nn. 3 and 7 carry and `bon-brev-p3-c10` recorded three times on p. 239. Rendered at that exact position in both languages.
- p. 245 n. **2** on `ratione perfectionis senarii`² — **left** column.
- p. 245 n. **3** on `sic nec debuit`³ — **left** column, mid-sentence and **before** the infinitive it governs (`differre`), which is why the marker sits where it does.
- p. 245 n. **4** on `ad bravium felicitatis aeternae`⁴ — **left** column, on Cap. IV's last word.

**★ THE HAND-OFF'S OWNERSHIP CLAIM HELD FOR ALL FIVE — AND ITS ONE VERIFIED LOCATION WAS THE ONLY ONE THAT WOULD NOT HAVE MISLED.** `bon-brev-p4-c3` forwarded p. 244 nn. 3–7 as anchoring below the `Cap. IV.` heading, which is true and is the only claim that governs ownership, and it explicitly flagged nn. 4–7 as ownership claims whose columns had not been read. **On the band the register divides 1 / 4 across the gutter: n. 3 alone anchors in the LEFT column and nn. 4–7 all anchor in the RIGHT, while the footer blocks divide 3 / 4** (left block nn. 1–3, right block the tail of n. 3 plus nn. 4–7). **The anchor split and the block split therefore differ by two notes on this page** — a wider mismatch than p. 243's one-note case, and in the opposite direction, since here the block break falls *below* the anchor break. **Read anchors, only anchors.**

**★ p. 245's REGISTER IS NINE NOTES, SPLIT CLEANLY BETWEEN THE BLOCKS, AND THE CAPITULUM BOUNDARY FALLS EXACTLY AT THE BLOCK BREAK.** p. 245's left block holds nn. **1–4** and closes **complete** at n. 4's `…Superius pro citra non pauci codd. et 2 inter.`; its right block opens with a **NUMBERED** `⁵` (`D E S secundo, et mox tertio pro postremo…`) and carries nn. **5–9**, closing complete at n. 9. The *capitulum* boundary also falls between nn. 4 and 5. **This is the COINCIDENCE shape — anchors, blocks and the capitulum division all agreeing — and it is the first page in Pars IV to show it.** Adding to the catalogue: overrun (pp. 220, 221, 226, 233, 239) · underrun (pp. 234, 237) · coincidence (pp. 231, 232, 235, 240, **245**) · split-inside-a-note (pp. 236, 238, 240, 243, 244) · both at once (p. 239) · split by PARS (p. 241) · split by CAPITULUM (pp. 242, 243, 244, **245**) · anchor/block mismatch of one note (p. 243) · **anchor/block mismatch of TWO notes, with the block break BELOW the anchor break (p. 244)**. **The footer block's extent still tells you nothing about which column, or which unit, a note's anchor is in — p. 244 and p. 245 are facing pages and behave oppositely.**

**★ NEITHER p. 244 NOR p. 245 CARRIES THE PRINTER'S SIGNATURE OR A QUIRE SIGNATURE.** `S. Bonav. — Tom. V.` last fell on p. 241. **p. 244's register is seven entries (fed to `KNOWN_TOTALS` by `p4-c3` and now closed by this chunk) and p. 245's is nine** — the latter band-derived here and newly fed to `check-vol5-apparatus.py`.

**Runover findings — ONE POSITIVE LOGGED, ONE NEGATIVE CLOSED FROM BOTH SIDES, ONE NEGATIVE CLOSED WITHIN A PAGE, ONE FORWARDED OPEN.**
- *Gutter-crossing within p. 244 — **POSITIVE**, and it is THIS chunk's to render and to log.* p. 244's left block breaks off inside **n. 3** at `— Superius pro a principio [2 cum aliquot`, at a **WORD boundary INSIDE A SQUARE-BRACKETED EDITORIAL LEMMA** — the eighth distinct break position in eight leaves and the first of its kind — and its right block opens **UNNUMBERED** with `codd. a primo principio] Vat., 1 et 3 in principio, et pro saeculorum B temporum.` before carrying nn. 4–7. **n. 3 is rendered joined above**, with the bracket closed where the plate closes it, and the runover is logged on `p4-c4`'s ledger line, exactly as `bon-brev-p4-c3` directed (it deliberately did not log it, because n. 3 anchors in Cap. IV). **Re-derived here from both sides on the bands, not adopted:** the left block's last line was read to its end at high zoom and the right block's first line was read from its start, and the right block's first line carries **no numeral**.
- *Page-crossing, p. 244 → p. 245 — **NEGATIVE**, CLOSED FROM BOTH SIDES.* `bon-brev-p4-c3` closed the p. 244 side (its right block ends complete at n. 7, `Cfr. tom. II. pag. 330, nota 5. in fine.`); **the p. 245 side is run here and agrees: p. 245's left footer block opens with a numbered entry** `¹` (`Secundum Bernard., Serm. 3. in Vigilia Nativit. Domini, n. 8. …`), with no unnumbered fragment above it. **The body crosses this leaf mid-word and the footer does not — the fourth consecutive leaf on which body and footer behave independently.**
- *Gutter-crossing within p. 245 — **NEGATIVE**, and run from both sides here.* p. 245's left block ends **complete** at n. 4 (`…et 2 inter.`) and its right block opens **numbered** at n. 5. Logged as a negative on this chunk's ledger line; **`bon-brev-p4-c5` must not re-log it.**
- *Page-crossing, p. 245 → p. 246 — **OPEN, and forwarded.*** p. 245's right block closes complete at n. 9 (`…aliique propter compendiosam scripturam ita legi possunt.`), so the test is **negative from the p. 245 side**; p. 246 has not been extracted and the p. 246 side must still be read by `bon-brev-p4-c5`.
- *The p. 243 → p. 244 page-crossing test was CLOSED NEGATIVE by `p4-c3` from both sides and is not re-logged here; `p4-c3` logs `p.243 n.5:gutter` and that is not re-logged either.*

**Digits and sigla settled off the bands** (450 dpi; p. 244's left and right footer blocks and p. 245's left block re-read under direct high-factor zoom). **★ Pars IV cites this same edition's Vols II, III and IV constantly, and every one of those digits is in the serif `1`/`4`, `3`/`5` confusion class. The controlling contrast remains the flagged `1` (angled top flag, closed stem, no counter) against the true `4` (crossbar, open triangular counter).**
- **★ `Gal. 4, 4. seq.` (p. 244 n. 3) — BOTH glyphs are the true `4`, and they are the reference specimens for this leaf.** Each carries the crossbar and the open triangular counter; the raw prints `Gal. i, i.` and resolves neither. **Sense is decisive twice over: Galatians 4, 4 is the *plenitudo temporis* verse quoted verbatim in the body two lines above the anchor.**
- **★ `III. Sent. d. 1. a. 2. q. 4. et dub. 1.` (p. 244 n. 3) — the two species within nine characters of each other, and a roman heading the run.** `III.` is roman (symmetric head-and-foot serifs); `d. 1.` and `dub. 1.` are the flagged upright; `a. 2.` and `q. 4.` are true digits, and the `4` of `q. 4.` prints the same open counter as `Gal. 4, 4.` on the line above. The raw gives `d. 1. a. 2. q. l. ct dul). 1.` and is right by accident where it is right at all.
- **`Vat., 1 et 3` (p. 244 n. 3; again in n. 6)** — an EDITION run: `Vat.` spelled out, then the arabic `1` and `3`. The `1` is the flagged upright and stands beside no codex letter. **There is never an edition `1` inside a run of codex letters, and never a codex `I` inside a run of edition numerals** — the rule cuts both ways and this entry is the clean case.
- **`Pro morbum 1 se aegrotantem.` (p. 244 n. 4) — an edition `1` standing entirely alone**, with no siglum run on either side to steady it. Read from the glyph alone: flagged top, closed stem, no counter, and materially narrower than the `4`s in n. 3 three lines above. Rendered in English as "edition 1" so the bare numeral cannot be misread as a page or a chapter.
- **★ `IV. Sent. d. 1. p. I. q. 5. fundam. 1.` (p. 244 n. 5) — ALL THREE SPECIES IN ONE CITATION, and the second time in Pars IV.** `IV.` roman (volume/book), `d. 1.` and `fundam. 1.` the flagged edition-shaped upright used here as an ordinal, `p. I.` the roman `I` (pars), `q. 5.` the old-style flat-bar `5`. **The roman `I` and the flagged `1` stand five characters apart** and print differently — symmetric serifs against an angled flag. The raw gives `d. 1. p. I. q. S.` and flattens the `5` to a letter.
- **★ `A G M N T` (p. 244 n. 5) — a CODEX run, and the same entry carries `et 2`, an EDITION.** Both species in one note, as p. 242 n. 5 had them. No upright appears inside the codex run, which is what the rule predicts.
- **★ `Cfr. tom. II. pag. 330, nota 5. in fine.` (p. 244 n. 7) — the roman `II` prints WITHOUT a crossbar here.** Two clean separate uprights with white between them, unlike p. 244 n. 2's `Anselm., II. Cur Deus homo` **on the very same page**, where the same roman prints with the crossbar and reads as `H`. **The `II`→`H` flattening is now demonstrated to vary WITHIN A SINGLE PAGE, not merely within an opening.** The referent here is settled and needs no glyph: `tom. II.` is this edition's Volume II, the form Quaracchi use throughout. `pag. 330` and `nota 5.` read clean.
- **★ `I. Cor. 15, 47` (p. 245 n. 1) — the flagged `1` and the true `4` in one three-character span, the cleanest contrast on either leaf.** The `1` of `15` has the angled flag and no counter; the `4` of `47` has the crossbar and the open counter; they are unmistakable side by side at high zoom. **Sense confirms: 1 Corinthians 15, 47 is *Primus homo de terra terrenus, secundus homo de caelo caelestis*, which the note quotes verbatim.** The leading `I.` is the roman book numeral. The raw gives `1. Cor. 45, 47` — **right about the verse and wrong about the chapter**, which is exactly the failure the rule exists for.
- **★ `O laboris, 1 de labore` (p. 245 n. 1) — an EDITION `1` closing a list that opens with codex sigla, and the hardest single glyph on these two leaves.** The run reads `F G H N P tribulationis, O laboris, 1 de labore a statu turbinis`: five codices, then one codex, then the upright. Under extreme zoom the upright carries **an angled top flag and no upper-right serif**, unlike the `I.` of `Vide I. Sent.` two lines below, which carries a full symmetric top serif. Read as the edition `1` and rendered "edition 1" in the English. **The two glyphs are eleven lines apart in the same footer block and were compared directly rather than judged in isolation.**
- **`F G H N P` and `D F H N` (p. 245 nn. 1–2) — TWO codex runs each containing a genuine `H`.** The standing caution holds: **the flattening is not a licence to read every `H` as `II`.** These sit inside alphabetical codex runs and are the ordinary codex H already attested on pp. 220 and 228.
- **`Vide I. Sent. d. 2. q. 4. scholion.` (p. 245 n. 2)** — `I.` roman (book), `d. 2.` clean, `q. 4.` the crossbarred digit. The raw gives `Vide 1. Sent.` and flattens the roman.
- **`In codd. et 2 omittitur debuit … 1, post salvatorem addito venire` (p. 245 n. 3)** — `2` and `1` are both editions; the `1` is the flagged upright, and it is followed immediately by a comma, not by a siglum letter. `B F` and `G N` are codex pairs.
- **★ `Psalm. 83, 8. — Phil. 3, 14` (p. 245 n. 4) — and BOTH citations are testable.** `14`'s `1` is the flagged upright against its own `4`'s crossbar in the same numeral. **Psalm 83, 8 (Vulg.) is *ibunt de virtute in virtutem*, which is the italic *de virtute in virtutem* the note anchors after; Philippians 3, 14 is *ad destinatum persequor ad bravium supernae vocationis*, which is the *ad bravium felicitatis aeternae* the anchor stands on.** The note quotes the Philippians text in full, so it checks itself.

**Preserved as printed, not harmonised.**
- **`Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia` carries the COLON — SEVENTH consecutive attestation** (Pars III capp. IX–XI, Pars IV capp. I–IV), and the one `bon-brev-p4-c3` sighted on this page and forwarded. p. 237's full stop remains the one-off.
- **The em-dash articulation reverses AGAIN, and this capitulum's distribution is a third pattern.** ` — ` stands **inside** the opening thesis (before `Post quos incarnari dignatus est`) and **inside** the *Ratio* paragraph (before `Quoniam ergo libertas arbitrii`), i.e. twice as a mid-paragraph member marker; but it stands **nowhere** in the *Rursus* and *Postremo* paragraphs, which are the two longest in the chapter and which open bare. So Cap. II used the dash for members and never for paragraph heads, Cap. III used it three times inside its closing period, and **Cap. IV uses it only in its first two paragraphs and abandons it entirely for the last two.** **Transcribed, never regularised.**
- **★ `Quoniam ergo` opens a MEMBER here, not a paragraph — the reverse of Cap. III one leaf earlier.** In Cap. III `Quoniam ergo incarnatio est a primo principio…` opens a paragraph bare; here `— Quoniam ergo libertas arbitrii hoc requirit…` runs on inside the *Ratio* paragraph after a dash. **The same formula, opposite typography, on facing leaves.** Set as the plate sets it.
- **The italics are selective and were set exactly as printed.** `tempore` is italic in the opening clause while `incarnationis` is roman; `fine temporum` and `plenitudine` are italic but the governing `tanquam in` is roman; the whole Galatians quotation is italic; the *Ratio*'s three members `libertatem arbitrii / sublimitatem remedii / integritatem universi` are italic and are picked up italic when each is developed (`libertas arbitrii`, `sublimitas remedii`, `integritas et perfectio universi`); `medicum / doctorem / adiutorem` are italic but the three `nullus quaerit` before them are roman; `scientia / virtute`, `ignorantia`, `superbia de virtute`, `habita scientia`, `cognita impotentia` are italic; `credatur / ametur`, `testimonia`, `promissa / desideria` are italic while the strings of verbs around them (`exspectaretur, differretur, desideraretur, amaretur, susciperetur, servaretur`) are all roman; and on p. 245 `gratiae`, `exhibitione misericordiae repromissae`, `principio aetatis sextae`, `solutio promissi`, `sexta aetas`, `plenitudo temporum`, `principio temporis`, `finem ultimum`, `salvatorem / morbi / iudicii / remedii`, `mediatorem`, `ductorem`, `de virtute in virtutem` and `ad bravium felicitatis aeternae` are italic while `plenitudinem`, `senarii`, `bravium` (in `currendi ad bravium`) and `ducem` are roman. **Quaracchi italicise a term where it is functioning as a member of a division or as a quoted formula, not wherever it recurs** — the rule Capp. II and III printed, holding a third time.
- **`« Deus cum limo »` is set ROMAN inside the guillemets**, not italic, although it is a quotation from Bernard and although the Galatians and Philippians quotations elsewhere in this chapter are italic. **Not harmonised.**
- **`non deest qui faciat, sed deest qui iubeat` is set roman and unmarked**, with no guillemets, although it is presented as speech (`qua dicebant: …`). p. 244 n. 5 records the variant `non deesse… sed deesse` and so treats it as a quotation; **the body and the apparatus differ in how they regard it, and that divergence is left standing.**

**Enumerations preserved exactly.** The **three** things according to which the reparative work befits and accords — *libertas arbitrii, sublimitas remedii, integritas (et perfectio) universi* — announced in the *Ratio* and then developed **in that order** by the *Quoniam ergo* member and the *Rursus* and *Postremo* paragraphs; the **three** *nullus quaerit* members (*medicus / doctor / adiutor*) answering **three** self-recognitions (*morbus / ignorantia / impotentia*); the **two** laws that go before (*lex naturae*, *lex figurae*, taken up as *lex naturae et Scripturae*) with the Patriarchs and Prophets between them and the incarnation after; the **sixth age** and the **sixth day**, paired term for term (first man last-founded on the sixth day for the world's completion / second man in the sixth age as the repaired world's complement); the **three** things the sixth age is apt for (*exercitium sapientiae, enervatio concupiscentiae, transitus a statu turbinis ad quietem*); the **three** things that bespeak fullness (*lex gratiae* fulfilling the law of Scripture, *solutio promissi* fulfilling the promise, *sexta aetas* by the perfection of the senary); the **two** rejected extremes (*principium temporis* too hasty / *finis ultimus* too tardy) with *tempus remedii* set in the middle between *tempus morbi* and *tempus iudicii*; and the **three** motives of the following (*timor iudicii* goading, *spes praemii* drawing, *perfectio exempli* animating).

**Marginalia** (Quaracchi editorial side-glosses, trimmed from the body per corpus convention; logged here in body order). p. 244 L — "Post duplicem legem, post Patriarchas et Prophetas." · "In fine temporum et plenitudine." · "Ratio." p. 244 R — "Congruit tribus." · "Congruit libertati arbitrii." · "Post duplicem legem." · "Item, sublimitati remedii." · "Post Patriarchas et Prophetas." · "Item, integritati universi." · "In fine temporum." p. 245 L — "In plenitudine temporum." **★ The gloss series is here a RUNNING OUTLINE, not the two-column thesis/answer apparatus of Capp. II–III** — no `Thesis N.` and no `Pro thesi N.` appears anywhere on these two leaves; instead the glosses track the *Ratio*'s three members with `Congruit …` / `Item, …` and repeat the chapter's own temporal markers (`Post duplicem legem`, `Post Patriarchas et Prophetas`, `In fine temporum`) **on both sides of the gutter, in the same words the body uses**. **The thesis/answer pattern therefore does NOT hold across Pars IV**, and the gloss form cannot be predicted from the preceding capitulum. Eleven glosses across five paragraphs. The series agrees with the `Cap. V.` heading about where Cap. IV ends; it was used to set nothing.

**No `[?]` flags.**

**Raw-quality verdict, per page AND per region.**
- **p. 244, left column, Cap. IV's opening — POOR, the WEAKEST run in Pars IV so far, and materially worse than the grade `bon-brev-p4-c3` gave the top of this same column.** **★ The `Cap. IV.` heading itself is SHATTERED — the raw gives `Cah. IV.`** and the display subtitle as `De incarnaiwne quanlum ad plenitudinem lcmporum.`; on the band both print clean, and **this chunk's opening boundary rests on that heading.** Body garbles: `De lcmpore vero`, `lioc tencndum`, `iicet Deus`, `Patriarcbas et Propbet;is`, `quilius et per quos`, `PosL`, `iiicamari dignatus`, `lanquam in fine lempo-rum`, `pkniludine`, `Apostolus^`, `plcniludo temporis`, `suxmi`, `muiicre`, `faclum'`, `u(`, `cos fjui sub Lege`, `redimeret.,`, `Hatio aulem`, `intelligeiitiam`. **Nineteen garbles in eighteen printed lines**, and **the three marginal glosses are shattered beyond recognition** (`i'u.ii dupii- ccra legcm,` · `posipairi.nr- chas el I'ro- phcias.` · `iii Qne lem- niiudiDc.` · `«.iiio-` for `Ratio.`) — the gloss text is not merely garbled but **interleaved into the body lines**, which is the same splicing the standing rule warns of.
- **p. 244, right column — GOOD, and a clear step UP from its own left column, the p. 243 relation repeated in reverse.** `coii;Mn; i`, `urbitrii`, `sublimitalem`, `cundnm integrilatem xiniversi`, `attendil`, `i in^riHi i`, `niain ergo`, `ni-inl/'`, `bil trahatur`, `humanuni`, `iit salulcm`, `nollct Salvalorem`, `saluteni`, `aateni`, `medieum`, `morljum*`, `sc ignorantem`, `adiutorcm`, `honio`, `rosfdup!;`, `"^"  '° '"`, `ignoraniia`, `virlute`, `iabeat`, `;uldidit legem`, `erudienteni`, `aggravantein`, `scienlia`, `cognila`, `inisericordiam`, `el gratiain`, `Chiisti. Meo post legeiii iialurae`, `debiiit`, `unm. sui.i`, `suhUmitas remcdii`, `crcdatur llde lirinissima`, `carittite`, `tunquaiii inyslerium secrelissimuiii`, `berriinum`, `congruentissinuim fuil, ul`, `r.JiPairi.T`, `praeirentinulta teslimonia`, `iiiielns.`, `veibis`, `liguris`, `lirinis tcstimoniis`, `sccretuin`, `eliam`, `j;/'omma`, `desideriu`, `iiroinissum teneficiuin`, `exspectatuni`, `susci[ie-retur`, `el sollicitius`, `inlcgritas et perfcctio`, `iieiu, iui`, `ver.si`, `sinl`, `ursi.'`, `lempora`, `deJjuit fieri iii`, `in liue lei`, `finc tempormn`, `lioino`, `tot.ius`, `hoino`, `coniuii`. **Sixty-five garbles in forty-four printed lines — about one and a half per line by count, but nearly all single-letter**, and the count is inflated because **seven marginal glosses are spliced into the body lines** (`coii;Mn; i`, `i in^riHi i`, `rosfdup!;`, `unm. sui.i`, `r.JiPairi.T`, `iieiu, iui`, `in liue lei`). Nothing is dropped and no whole word is lost.
- **p. 244 footer, nn. 3–7 (the five owned here) — FLATTENED, and the citation digits are again the worst of it.** `Gal. i , i. seq.`, `Vide de lioc cap.`, `d. 1. a. 2. q. l. ct dul). 1.`, `Sui)ci'ius pro a principio [2 cuni aliquot`, `Val., I ct 3 in principio`, `saf-culormi n tcmporum` (for `saeculorum B temporum` — **the codex siglum `B` misread as `n`**), `Pro morbum 1 se acrjrotantem.`, `Secundum llug. a S. Vicl.`, `IV. Scnl. d. 1. p. I. q. S.`, `Supcrius pro dicebanl`, `depsrAGMNT` (the sigla fused to the preceding word), `non deosse... scd deeBse`, `e< arnntum`, `susciperetnr`, `susce-ptitm solticitius`, `Cfr. lom. II. pag. 330, nota 5. in liiic.` **The raw happens to get `2`, `3`, `330` and `nota 5.` right; every digit and every siglum in the register was still settled on the band.**
- **p. 245, left column — FAIR, and a step DOWN from p. 244's right column across the leaf.** `gitiir ciim ultimo`, `scilicct « Deiis c.iim liino'»`, `(ic-ret iii liiic teiiipi)ruiii`, `lioc cst iii st;xl;i aetale`, `excrciliiim siipiciitiae`, `ciier-vatioiiem concupisceritiae`, `traiisitiim a slatu turbiiiis ad c(uietcm`, `quac oninia coinpctuiit scxlae aelati`, `miindi propter iiicarnationcm Filii Dci`, `crgo advcntiis Cliristi fiiit`, `i.iciiitu- lOlllllO-` (the gloss `In plenitudine temporum.` shattered and spliced), `le''is (iralkie`, `e.rhibUione nmcncordiue`, `aelulis se.rl.ue`, `dicuiit plcniludinem`, `cpiia lcx (jraUae im[iiet`, `implct`, `scrla aelus rationc perfectioiiis scnarii`, `liinc est`, `advciitii`, `csse pleniludo`, `propler lioc`, `tjuod`, `tcmpus finiatiir`, `Siciit aiilem`, `prinvipio temporis`, `qiiia`, `faisset fcstinus` (for *fuisset*), `dcbuit'`, `iliflcrre usqiie in fmcm ultimum`, `csset tardus`, **`Decetet enim salvatorem`** (for `Decebat enim` — **the worst token on the page, and a real word-level corruption rather than a letter substitution**), `morhi`, `introtiucere`, `Deccbat mediatoreni`, `inembrorum`, `clorem perfectum`, `ostendcrc`, `braviiim`, `linale iudicium`, `siiem praemii`, `perfcctioncm cxempli`, `perfectc`, `dc virtutc in virtutem`, `ud liravium felicitatis aeternue`. **Forty-five garbles in thirty printed lines — about one and a half per line**, one of them (`Decetet`) a corruption a reader could take for a real form. **★ The `Cap. V.` heading, by contrast, prints CLEAN in the raw (`Cap. V.`), unlike p. 244's `Cah.` — the raw damages chapter headings unpredictably, so the band remains the only witness.** The display subtitle garbles two words (`plemtudine grutiue`, `churismata`).
- **p. 245 footer, nn. 1–4 (the four owned here) — FLATTENED but legible, and its digits are the most consequential on the leaf.** `Secundum Bernard., Scrm. 3.`, `Vigilia Nativit.`, `Superius respicitur 1. Cor. 45, 47` (**the chapter wrong and the verse right in a single citation** — the clearest case yet for reading every digit off the plate), `Primus homo de terra, terrenus`, `cfr. supra Prolog. § 2.`, `pro turbinis F G H N P`, `O laboris, 1 de labore`, `Vide 1. Sent. d. 2. q. 4. scholion` (the roman `I` flattened to an edition `1` — the mirror of the p. 245 n. 1 case in the entry immediately below it), `D F H N gratiae`, `In codd. et 2 omittitur debuit`, `B F ut in medio`, `G N legunt`, `Psalm. 83, 8.`, `Phil. 3, 14`, `Pro usque quo E quousque`, `et 2 inter`.

**Hand-offs.**
- *Picked up from `bon-brev-p4-c3`:* **p. 244 footer notes 3–7 — FIVE entries, closing p. 244's register.** Every anchor was re-derived on the band, and **the ownership claim held for all five** (all anchor below the `Cap. IV.` heading). **The one location the hand-off had personally verified — n. 3 on `iuxta quod dicit Apostolus³` in the LEFT column — held exactly; the four it flagged as unverified all anchor in the RIGHT column**, so the register divides 1 / 4 across the gutter against a 3 / 4 block split. **Every digit and siglum was re-read at 450 dpi rather than adopted from the hand-off's orientation text**, and the hand-off's transcriptions held in every particular. Its other structural claims also held: Cap. IV opens part-way down p. 244's left column with `De tempore vero incarnationis hoc tenendum est…` and no incoming seam; Cap. IV runs past p. 244, whose right column ends mid-word at `…primum principium coniun`; p. 244's register is seven entries; p. 244's gutter runover is positive, inside n. 3, at a word boundary inside a square-bracketed lemma, and is rendered joined and logged here; p. 244's gutter is 1367 and not the default 1346. **The forwarded `Ratio … haec est: quia` colon sighting also held.**
- *Forwarded to `bon-brev-p4-c5` (Pars IV, Cap. V, *De plenitudine gratiae Christi quantum ad charismata in affectu*):* **p. 245 footer notes 5–9 — FIVE entries, all of them Cap. V's.** Anchors verified on the band as falling below the `Cap. V.` heading; **n. 5 anchors on `deinde⁵` in Cap. V's opening divisio and n. 6 on `meriti in opere vel effectu⁶` closing the same sentence, both in p. 245's LEFT column** — the only two positions read here, so **nn. 7–9 are ownership claims only and their locations must be re-derived.** **★ p. 245's own gutter runover is NEGATIVE and is closed here from both sides — do NOT re-log it**: the left block ends complete at n. 4 and the right block opens numbered at n. 5. **The p. 244 → p. 245 page-crossing test is CLOSED NEGATIVE from both sides here and must not be re-logged. The p. 245 → p. 246 test is still open** (p. 245's right block closes complete at n. 9, `…aliique propter compendiosam scripturam ita legi possunt.`, so it is negative from the p. 245 side, but p. 246 has not been read).
- *Recorded for `bon-brev-p4-c5`, from bands read here but not owned here:* **Cap. V opens part-way down p. 245's LEFT column** under `Cap. V. / De plenitudine gratiae Christi quantum ad charismata in affectu.`, with `Postquam innotuit nobis Verbum incarnatum quantum ad unionem naturarum, considerandum est quantum ad plenitudinem charismatum spiritualium…` — **no incoming body-text seam to reconstruct.** It crosses p. 245's gutter and **runs past p. 245's foot: the right column ends at `…et hoc nullo modo fieri potest nisi per summe`**, so **p. 246 must be extracted and auto-measured FRESH and Cap. V's end fixed positively from the `Cap. VI.` heading there.** **p. 245's bands exist; its gutter is 1201 — adopted after re-profiling fourteen row windows (1196–1206), NOT the unflagged default 1206/56 px, which is inside the tolerance but on a sub-60 px run. p. 245's nine-note register IS band-read and IS newly in `KNOWN_TOTALS` (245: 9).** **★ And note that the two-column `Thesis N.` / `Pro thesi N.` gloss apparatus, absent from Cap. IV, RETURNS in Cap. V — p. 245's right column already prints `Pro thesi 2.`, `Thesis 3.` and `Triplex gratia.`**

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