title: Pars 2, Cap. 10

source_text:
<!-- page 227 -->

### Capitulum X. *De productione hominis quantum ad corpus.*

De *corpore* vero humano in statu primae conditionis tenenda sunt haec secundum doctrinam fidei

<!-- page 228 -->

orthodoxae, videlicet quod corpus primi hominis sic conditum fuit et *de limo terrae*[^p228-1] formatum, ut tamen esset animae *subiectum* et suo modo *proportionabile*, *proportionabile*, inquam, quantum ad *complexionem* aequalem, quantum ad *organizationem* pulcherrimam et multiformem et quantum ad *rectitudinem staturae*; *subiectum* autem, ut esset *obtemperans* sine rebellione, esset etiam *propagans* et propagabile sine libidine, esset *vegetabile* sine defectione, esset etiam *immutabile* ad[^p228-2] omnimodam incorruptionem, non interveniente morte; et secundum hoc datus est sibi locus paradisi terrestris in habitationem tranquillam. — Formata est *mulier* de latere viri in consortium et adiutorium ad propagationem immaculatam; datum est etiam *lignum vitae*[^p228-3] ad vegetationem continuam, et tandem ad immutationem perfectam per immortalitatem perpetuam.

Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia, cum primum principium sit in producendo potentissimum, sapientissimum et optimum, et in omnibus effectibus suis hoc aliquo modo manifestet; potissime debuit hoc manifestare in ultimo effectu et nobilissimo; cuiusmodi est homo, quem inter ceteras creaturas produxit ultimo, ut in hoc potissime appareret et reluceret divinorum operum consummatio.

Ut igitur in homine manifestaretur Dei *potentia*, ideo fecit eum ex naturis maxime distantibus, coniunctis in unam personam et naturam; cuiusmodi sunt corpus et anima, quorum unum est substantia corporea, alterum vero, scilicet anima, est substantia spiritualis et incorporea; quae in genere substantiae maxime distant[^p228-4].

Ut vero ibidem manifestaretur Dei *sapientia*, fecit tale corpus, ut *proportionem* suo modo haberet ad animam. Quoniam ergo corpus unitur animae ut *perficienti* et *moventi* et *ad beatitudinem sursum tendenti*[^p228-5]; ideo, ut conformaretur animae *vivificanti*, habuit *complexionem* aequalem non a *pondere*, vel *mole*, sed ab *aequalitate naturalis iustitiae*, quae disponit ad nobilissimum modum vitae. — Ut autem conformaretur *moventi* per multiformitatem potentiarum, habuit *multiformitatem organorum* cum summa venustate et artificiositate et ductibilitate; sicut patet in facie et in manu, quae est « organum organorum[^p228-6] ». — Ut autem conformaretur animae *sursum tendenti ad caelum*, habuit *rectitudinem staturae* et caput sursum erectum; ut sic corporalis rectitudo mentali rectitudini attestaretur.

Postremo, ut in homine manifestaretur Dei *bonitas* et benevolentia, ideo fecit hominem absque omni macula et culpa et absque omni poena sive miseria. Cum enim primum principium simul sit *optimum* et *iustissimum*; quia *optimum*, non debuit facere hominem nisi bonum, ac per hoc innocentem et rectum[^p228-7]; quia *iustissimum*, poenam non debuit infligere ei qui nullum omnino habebat peccatum: ac per hoc tale corpus constituit illi animae rationali, quod ita sibi esset *obtemperans*, ut nulla esset in eo pugna rebellionis, nulla pronitas libidinis, nulla imminutio vigoris, nulla corruptio mortis; ita etiam esset *animae conforme*, ut, sicut anima erat innocens, et tamen poterat cadere in culpam, sic corpus esset impassibile, et tamen posset cadere in poenam; et ideo « poterat non mori, et poterat mori[^p228-8] »; poterat habere sufficientiam, et poterat habere indigentiam; poterat animae obtemperare, et poterat etiam adversus eam rebellionem et pugnam habere.

Et propterea in statu illo corpus erat tale, ut ab eo fieret *decisio seminalis* ad propagationem prolis per adminiculum sexus muliebris pariter comprincipiantis; fieret etiam *humoris nutrimentalis consumtio* per actionem caloris; fieret etiam nihilominus *restauratio* per alimentum lignorum paradisi, restaurato per lignum vitae, seu praeservato humido radicali; quod quidem lignum hanc virtutem habuit, ob quam, ut dicit Augustinus[^p228-9], fuit non solum in cibum, verum etiam in Sacramentum. — Incorruptio igitur et immortalitas corporis Adae principaliter veniebat ab *anima* sicut a continente et influente, a *corporis bona et aequali complexione* sicut a disponente et suscipiente, a *ligno* autem *vitae* sicut a

<!-- page 229 -->

vegetante et adminiculante, a *regimine* vero *divinae providentiae* sicut interius conservante et exterius protegente.

english:
### Chapter X. *On the production of man as regards the body.*

Concerning the human *body*, however, in the state of its first condition, these things are to be held according to the doctrine of the orthodox

<!-- page 228 -->

faith: namely, that the body of the first man was so founded and formed *from the slime of the earth*[^p228-1] that it should nevertheless be *subject* to the soul and in its own manner *proportionable* to it — *proportionable*, I say, as regards an equal *complexion*, as regards a most beautiful and multiform *organization*, and as regards *uprightness of stature*; and *subject*, that it might be *obedient* without rebellion, might also be *propagating* and propagable without lust, might be *capable of growth* without failing, and might also be *unchangeable* toward[^p228-2] an incorruption of every kind, with no death intervening; and according to this there was given to it the place of the earthly paradise for a tranquil dwelling. — *Woman* was formed from the side of the man for fellowship and help toward an immaculate propagation; there was also given the *tree of life*[^p228-3] for continual growth, and at length for a perfect transformation into a perpetual immortality.

Now the reason for the understanding of the foresaid is this: that since the first principle is in producing most powerful, most wise and best, and manifests this in some manner in all its effects, it had most of all to manifest this in the last and noblest effect — of which sort is man, whom it produced last among the other creatures, so that in him most of all the consummation of the divine works might appear and shine forth.

That the *power* of God, therefore, might be manifested in man, it made him out of natures most widely distant, conjoined into one person and nature; of which sort are body and soul, of which the one is a corporeal substance, and the other, namely the soul, is a spiritual and incorporeal substance — which in the genus of substance are most widely distant[^p228-4].

But that the *wisdom* of God might be manifested in the same place, it made such a body as would have, in its own manner, a *proportion* to the soul. Since, therefore, the body is united to the soul as to what *perfects* and *moves* it and *tends upward to beatitude*[^p228-5]: therefore, that it might be conformed to the *life-giving* soul, it had an equal *complexion* — not from *weight* or *mass*, but from *the equality of natural justice*, which disposes toward the noblest mode of life. — And that it might be conformed to the soul as *mover*, through the multiformity of its powers, it had a *multiformity of organs* with the utmost gracefulness and artistry and pliancy; as appears in the face and in the hand, which is « the organ of organs[^p228-6] ». — And that it might be conformed to the soul *tending upward to heaven*, it had *uprightness of stature* and a head erect on high; so that thus bodily uprightness might bear witness to uprightness of mind.

Lastly, that the *goodness* and benevolence of God might be manifested in man, it therefore made man without any stain and guilt and without any punishment or misery. For since the first principle is at once *best* and *most just*: because *best*, it ought not to make man other than good, and through this innocent and upright[^p228-7]; because *most just*, it ought not to inflict punishment on him who had no sin at all. And through this it constituted for that rational soul such a body as would be so *obedient* to it that there would be in it no strife of rebellion, no proneness to lust, no diminution of vigour, no corruption of death; and would likewise be so *conformed to the soul* that, just as the soul was innocent and yet could fall into guilt, so the body would be impassible and yet could fall into punishment; and therefore « it could not die, and it could die[^p228-8] »; it could have sufficiency, and it could have want; it could obey the soul, and it could also have rebellion and strife against it.

And for this reason, in that state the body was such that from it there would come a *seminal severance* for the propagation of offspring, through the aid of the female sex co-originating equally with it; there would also come a *consuming of the nutrimental humour* through the action of heat; and there would nonetheless come a *restoration* through the food of the trees of paradise, the radical moisture being restored — or rather preserved — through the tree of life; which tree indeed had this power, on account of which, as Augustine says[^p228-9], it was not only for food but also for a Sacrament. — The incorruption, therefore, and immortality of Adam's body came principally from the *soul* as from that which contains and inflows; from *the good and equal complexion of the body* as from that which disposes and receives; from the *tree of life* as from that which

<!-- page 229 -->

gives growth and support; and from the *governance of divine providence* as from that which inwardly conserves and outwardly protects.

la: Gen. 2, 7. — Pro *orthodoxae* plures codd. *orthodoxam*.

en: Gen. 2:7. — For *orthodoxae* very many codices [read] *orthodoxam*.

la: S habet *per*.

en: S has *per*.

la: Gen. 2, 9. — De formatione corporis humani eiusque proportionabilitate cfr. II. Sent. d. 17. a. 2. q. 1-3; de productione corporis mulieris de latere viri vide ibid. d. 18. a. 1. q. 1; de immortalitate corporis agitur ibid. d. 19. a. 2. q. 1. seq., et de propagatione eius ibid. d. 20. per totam. — Inferius pro *per* I O U V *et*. Subinde post *sapientissimum* L U V addunt *et benevolentissimum*.

en: Gen. 2:9. — On the formation of the human body and its proportionability compare II *Sent.* d. 17, a. 2, q. 1–3; on the production of the woman's body from the side of the man see ibid. d. 18, a. 1, q. 1; on the immortality of the body the matter is treated ibid. d. 19, a. 2, q. 1 and following; and on its propagation ibid. d. 20, throughout. — Below, for *per* I O U V [read] *et*. Thereafter, after *sapientissimum*, L U V add *et benevolentissimum*.

la: Utpote supremae species substantiae.

en: Inasmuch as they are the highest species of substance.

la: Cfr. cap. praeced. — De aequalitate *a pondere* et *a iustitia* cfr. II. Sent. d. 17. a. 2. q. 3.

en: Compare the preceding chapter. — On equality *from weight* and *from justice* compare II *Sent.* d. 17, a. 2, q. 3.

la: Aristot. supra pag. 161, nota 2. allegatus. — De seq. propositione cfr. Alex. Hal., S. p. II. q. 81. m. 2, qui ad ipsam confirmandam praeter alios adducit Ovid., I. Metamorph. v. 84-86, et August., 83 Qq. q. 51. n. 3. — Inferius pro *mentali* Q S *mentis*.

en: Aristotle, cited above at p. 161, note 2. — On the following proposition compare Alexander of Hales, *Summa* p. II, q. 81, m. 2, who to confirm it adduces, besides others, Ovid, I *Metamorphoses* vv. 84–86, and Augustine, *83 Questions*, q. 51, n. 3. — Below, for *mentali* Q S [read] *mentis*.

la: Eccle. 7, 30: *Solummodo hoc inveni, quod fecerit Deus hominem rectum.* Cfr. supra pag. 225, nota 1. — August., III. de Lib. arb. c. 18. n. 51: *Omnis autem poena, si iusta est, peccati poena est* etc. — Superius I L M omittunt *et culpa*, non pauci codd. et 2 autem *macula et*.

en: Eccl. 7:30: *Only this have I found, that God made man upright.* Compare above, p. 225, note 1. — Augustine, III *On Free Choice* c. 18, n. 51: *But every punishment, if it is just, is the punishment of sin*, etc. — Above, I L M omit *et culpa*; not a few codices and edition 2, however, [omit] *macula et*.

la: August., VI. de Gen. ad lit. c. 25. n. 36. Cfr. II. Sent. lit. Magistri, d. XIX. c. 1. seqq. — Inferius fide B H Q (M a secunda manu) supplevimus *animae*, et subinde fide A B D F H I M S *etiam adversus eam* (Q *etiam adversus animam*).

en: Augustine, VI *On Genesis to the Letter* c. 25, n. 36. Compare II *Sent.*, the Master's text, d. XIX, c. 1 and following. — Below, on the authority of B H Q (M by a second hand) we have supplied *animae*, and thereafter, on the authority of A B D F H I M S, *etiam adversus eam* (Q *etiam adversus animam*).

la: Libr. VIII. de Gen. ad lit. c. 4. n. 8: *Erat ei ergo in lignis ceteris alimentum, in illo autem Sacramentum.* Cfr. XIII. de Civ. Dei, c. 20. et VI. Op. imperf. contra Iulian. c. 30. — De *humido radicali* vide tom. I. pag. 316, nota 12. verba Scoti. — E H legunt: *Fuit non solum in sustentationis cibum, verum etiam in Sacramentum; et hoc propter latentem virtutem eius, qua scilicet praeter sustentationem ipsius manifestam occultam virtutem, conservandi scilicet ipsos et omnes posteros, habuit, ne veterascerent et vetustate perirent.* Inferius pro *complexione* multi codd. et 2 *compositione*.

en: Book VIII *On Genesis to the Letter* c. 4, n. 8: *He had, therefore, nourishment in the other trees, but in that one a Sacrament.* Compare XIII *On the City of God* c. 20, and VI *Unfinished Work against Julian* c. 30. — On the *radical moisture* see vol. I, p. 316, note 12, the words of Scotus. — E H read: *It was not only for the food of sustenance, but also for a Sacrament; and this on account of its hidden power, by which, namely, beyond its own manifest sustenance, it had a hidden power — of preserving, namely, themselves and all their posterity — that they should not grow old and perish by age.* Below, for *complexione* many codices and edition 2 [read] *compositione*.

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin base from the IA djvu raw (L42913–43151), verified against the 450 dpi column bands of pp.227–229. Gutters auto-measured: p.227 = 1211 (carried over from c9), **p.228 = 1365** (54 px run), **p.229 = 1222** (53 px run).

**Page span — three printed pages, one footer register.** Cap. X opens in the last four lines of **p.227's right** column at the `Cap. X.` heading, breaking at `…secundum doctrinam fidei` / `orthodoxae`; runs the whole of **p.228**, both columns; and closes in the **first three lines of p.229's left** column at `…interius conservante et exterius protegente`, immediately above the `Cap. XI.` heading. Boundary taken from the next heading.

**⚠⚠ A chunk can span three pages and own the notes of only one.** p.227 gives it nothing (established in c9 — Cap. X's opening sentence carries no superscript), and **p.229 gives it nothing either**: the three-line tail here carries no anchor, and p.229 n. 1 anchors on `in paradiso collocato¹` in Cap. XI's first sentence. Both ends verified positively on the bands. **This chunk inherits nothing and forwards nothing** — the first such case in Pars II, where per-page footer splits have otherwise been the norm. It is the strongest form yet of the standing rule: **note ownership comes from anchors on the band, never from which pages a chunk happens to cover.**

**Apparatus (9 entries), all from p.228.** The left footer carries nn. 1–7 and the right the n. 7 continuation plus nn. 8–9.

**Runover — POSITIVE, column-crossing.** p.228's left footer ends with n. 7 broken mid-quotation at `…quod fecerit Deus`, and the right footer opens with an **unnumbered** `hominem rectum. Cfr. supra pag. 225, nota 1…` before its first numbered entry `⁸`. Rejoined here. The break falls inside the Ecclesiastes quotation between verb and object, so the fragment left at the column foot is plainly unfinished. This chunk's verdict is recorded in `manual-review/vol5-runover-ledger.tsv`; totals come from `tools/check-vol5-census.py`.

**⚠ Two digit corrections in one footer, both caught only on the band.** In n. 7 the raw gives `Cfr. supra pag. 223, nota 1`; the band reads **225** — and 225 is right on internal evidence too, since p.225 n. 1 is the *a bono non procedit nisi bonum* note that the argument here depends on, while p.223 is the firmament register. In n. 8 the raw gives `VI. de Gen. ad lit. c. 23. n. 36`; the band reads **c. 25**. This is the serif `1`/`4` and `3`/`5` family again: **cross-check every digit in a Vol V citation against the band, and where possible against what the citation must mean.**

**Readings settled off the bands.** n. 3 carries **two different siglum sets one clause apart** — `pro per I O U V et` and `post sapientissimum L U V addunt` — where the raw flattens the first to `LUV` and so silently merges them; the band distinguishes the narrow `I` from the footed `L`. n. 9's `E H` is the **third** instance of that pair after p.226 n. 5 (`B H`) and p.227 n. 5 (`E H`), so the raw's `II` for `H` is now a settled correspondence rather than a suspicion. In the body, the small mark printed after `per` in `ad immutationem perfectam per immortalitatem perpetuam` is **not an anchor** — n. 3 names *per* as a lemma discussed *inferius*, and the next numbered note (4) anchors in the right column; treated as ink, not a superscript. No `[?]` flags.

**Marginalia** (trimmed from body, body order): p.228 L — "Tria de corpore." · "Proportionabile tripliciter." · "Subiectum quadrupliciter." · "Mulier." · "Lignum vitae." · "Ratio." · "Manifestatur Dei potentia." · "Item sapientia." · "Distinctio." · "Membrum 1." p.228 R — "Membrum 2." · "Membrum 3." · "Item bonitas." · "Status primitivus." · "De muliere socia et ligno vitae." · "Origo immortalitatis." pp.227 and 229 carry none on this chapter's runs.

**Hand-offs.**
- *Picked up:* **nothing.**
- *Forwarded to `bon-brev-p2-c11`:* **nothing.** Cap. XI (*De productione hominis quantum ad totum coniunctum*) opens in **p.229's left** column at the `Cap. XI.` heading (raw **L43152**), text beginning `De toto autem homine in paradiso collocato¹ haec tenenda sunt, scilicet quod datus est ei duplex sensus…`. **p.229's whole footer register is Cap. XI's** — its n. 1 anchors on that first sentence's `collocato`. p.229 bands are generated (gutter 1222) but only the top of the left column has been read; c11 must read the rest of p.229 and, per the index (c12 at p.230), expect p.230's footers to split between c11 and c12.


site: bonaventure

collection: Breviloquium

title: Pars 2, Cap. 11

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 229 -->

### Capitulum XI. *De productione hominis quantum ad totum coniunctum.*

De *toto* autem *homine* in paradiso collocato[^p229-1] haec tenenda sunt, scilicet quod datus est ei duplex *sensus*, scilicet interior et exterior, mentis et carnis. — Datus est ei duplex *motus*, scilicet imperativus in voluntate et exsecutivus in corpore. — Datum est ei duplex *bonum*, unum visibile, alterum invisibile. — Datum est ei duplex *praeceptum*, scilicet *naturae* et *disciplinae*; praeceptum *naturae*: *Crescite et multiplicamini*[^p229-2]; praeceptum *disciplinae*: *De ligno scientiae boni et mali ne comedas*. — Iuxta quae datum est sibi *quadruplex adiutorium*, scilicet scientiae, conscientiae, synderesis et gratiae, ex quibus sufficienter habuit, ut posset stare in bono et proficere et a malo cavere et declinare.

Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia primum principium fecit mundum istum sensibilem ad declarandum se ipsum, videlicet ad hoc, quod per illum tanquam per speculum et vestigium reduceretur homo in Deum[^p229-3] artificem, amandum et laudandum. Et secundum hoc duplex est *liber*, unus scilicet scriptus *intus*, qui est aeterna Dei ars et sapientia; et alius scriptus *foris*, mundus scilicet sensibilis. Cum igitur esset una creatura, quae sensum habebat *intus* ad cognitionem libri *interioris*, ut Angelus; et alia, quae totum sensum habebat *foris*, ut quodlibet animal brutum: ad perfectionem universitatis debuit fieri creatura, quae hoc sensu duplici esset praedita ad cognitionem libri scripti *intus et foris*, id est Sapientiae et sui operis. Et quia in Christo simul concurrit aeterna Sapientia et eius opus in una persona; ideo dicitur *liber scriptus intus et foris*[^p229-4] ad reparationem mundi.

Et quia cuilibet sensui respondet motus, ideo duplex datus est homini *motus*: unus secundum instinctum *rationis* in mente, alius secundum instinctum *sensualitatis* in carne[^p229-5]. Primi est *imperare*, secundi est *obtemperare*, secundum rectum ordinem; quando autem fit e converso, tunc rectitudo et regimen animae praecipitatur de statu suo.

Et quia cuilibet motui et sensui respondet appetitus ad aliquod *bonum*, ideo praeparatum est homini duplex *bonum*: « unum visibile, alterum invisibile; unum temporale, aliud aeternum; unum carni, alterum spiritui. Ex his bonis Deus unum dedit, alterum promisit, ut unum gratis possideretur, alterum per meritum quaereretur[^p229-6] ».

Et quia frustra datur bonum, nisi custodiatur; frustra promittitur, nisi ad ipsum perveniatur: ideo duplex datum est homini *praeceptum*: unum *naturae* ad custodiendum bonum datum, alterum *disciplinae* ad promerendum bonum promissum, quod nullo modo melius poterat mereri quam per *meram obedientiam*. *Obedientia* autem *mera* est, quando praeceptum ex se solo obligat, non ex aliqua alia causa; et tale dicitur *praeceptum disciplinae*, quia per ipsum discitur, quanta sit virtus obedientiae, quae suo merito ducit ad caelum, suo vero contrario[^p229-7] praecipitat in infernum. Non ergo datum est illud mandatum homini propter indigentiam aliquam, quam Deus haberet de humano obsequio; sed ad dandam viam merendi coronam per meram et voluntariam obedientiam.

Et quoniam homo ratione naturae defectivae, ex nihilo formatae nec per gloriam confirmatae poterat cadere; benignissimus Deus *quadruplex* ei contulit *adiutorium*: duplex *naturae* et duplex *gratiae*. Duplicem enim indidit rectitudinem ipsi *naturae*: unam ad recte iudicandum, et haec est *rectitudo conscientiae*; aliam ad recte volendum, et haec est *synderesis*[^p229-8], cuius est remurmurare contra malum et stimulare ad bonum. — Duplicem etiam superaddidit perfectionem *gratiae*: unam gratiae *gratis datae*, quae fuit scientia illuminans intellectum ad cognoscendum se ipsum, Deum suum et mundum istum, qui factus fuerat propter ipsum; aliam gratiae *gratum facientis*, quae fuit caritas habilitans affectum ad diligendum Deum super omnia et proximum

<!-- page 230 -->

sicut se ipsum[^p230-1]. — Et sic ante lapsum homo perfecta habuit naturalia, supervestita nihilominus divina gratia. Ex quo manifeste colligitur, quod si cecidit, hoc non fuit nisi ex culpa sua, quia obedire contempsit.

english:
### Chapter XI. *On the production of man as regards the whole conjoined being.*

Concerning the *whole man*, however, placed in paradise[^p229-1], these things are to be held: namely, that there was given to him a twofold *sense*, that is, interior and exterior, of the mind and of the flesh. — There was given to him a twofold *motion*, that is, imperative in the will and executive in the body. — There was given to him a twofold *good*, one visible, the other invisible. — There was given to him a twofold *precept*, that is, of *nature* and of *discipline*; the precept of *nature*: *Increase and multiply*[^p229-2]; the precept of *discipline*: *Of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil thou shalt not eat*. — Alongside which there was given to him a *fourfold help*, namely of knowledge, of conscience, of synderesis and of grace, from which he had sufficiently wherewith to stand in the good and advance, and to beware of evil and turn away from it.

Now the reason for the understanding of the foresaid is this: that the first principle made this sensible world to declare itself — namely to this end, that through it, as through a mirror and a vestige, man might be led back to God[^p229-3] the craftsman, to be loved and praised. And according to this the *book* is twofold: one written *within*, which is the eternal art and wisdom of God; and another written *without*, namely the sensible world. Since, therefore, there was one creature that had sense *within* for the knowledge of the *interior* book, as the Angel; and another that had its whole sense *without*, as any brute animal: for the perfection of the universe there had to come to be a creature endowed with this twofold sense for the knowledge of the book written *within and without*, that is, of Wisdom and of its work. And because in Christ the eternal Wisdom and its work concur at once in one person, therefore he is called *a book written within and without*[^p229-4] for the repair of the world.

And because to every sense there corresponds a motion, therefore a twofold *motion* was given to man: one according to the instinct of *reason* in the mind, the other according to the instinct of *sensuality* in the flesh[^p229-5]. To the first belongs *to command*, to the second *to obey*, according to the right order; but when it comes about the other way round, then the uprightness and governance of the soul is cast down from its state.

And because to every motion and sense there corresponds an appetite for some *good*, therefore a twofold *good* was prepared for man: « one visible, the other invisible; one temporal, the other eternal; one for the flesh, the other for the spirit. Of these goods God gave the one and promised the other, that the one might be possessed freely, and the other sought through merit[^p229-6] ».

And because a good is given in vain unless it be kept, and promised in vain unless it be attained: therefore a twofold *precept* was given to man — one of *nature*, for keeping the good given; the other of *discipline*, for meriting the good promised, which in no way could he better merit than through *pure obedience*. And *obedience* is *pure* when the precept obliges of itself alone, and not from any other cause; and such is called a *precept of discipline*, because through it is learned how great is the power of obedience, which by its merit leads to heaven, and by its contrary[^p229-7] casts down into hell. That command, therefore, was not given to man on account of any need that God might have of human service, but to give a way of meriting the crown through pure and voluntary obedience.

And since man, by reason of a nature defective, formed from nothing and not confirmed through glory, was able to fall, the most kindly God conferred on him a *fourfold help*: twofold of *nature* and twofold of *grace*. For he implanted in *nature* itself a twofold uprightness: one for judging rightly, and this is the *uprightness of conscience*; the other for willing rightly, and this is *synderesis*[^p229-8], whose office is to murmur back against evil and to spur toward good. — He also superadded a twofold perfection of *grace*: one of *freely given* grace, which was the knowledge illumining the intellect to know itself, its God, and this world which had been made for its sake; the other of *grace making pleasing*, which was the charity enabling the affection to love God above all things and one's neighbour

<!-- page 230 -->

as oneself[^p230-1]. — And thus before the fall man had his natural endowments perfect, clothed over nonetheless with divine grace. From which it is manifestly gathered that, if he fell, this was only from his own fault, because he scorned to obey.

la: Retinuimus cum Vat., 1 et 3 *collocato*, pro quo codd. et 2 *formato*; sed Gen. 2, 8. dicitur: *In quo* [paradiso] *posuit hominem, quem formaverat.* Cfr. II. Sent. d. 17. dub. 2, ubi ratio affertur, propter quam homo *extra* paradisum productus sit.

en: We have retained, with the Vatican [edition] and editions 1 and 3, *collocato*, for which the codices and edition 2 [read] *formato*; but Gen. 2:8 says: *In which* [paradise] *he placed the man whom he had formed.* Compare II *Sent.* d. 17, dubium 2, where the reason is given why man was produced *outside* paradise.

la: Gen. 1, 28. — Seq. locus est ibid. 2, 17. — Inferius respicitur Ps. 36, 27: *Declina a malo et fac bonum.* — De duplici bono cfr. II. Sent. lit. Magistri, d. XX. c. 6; de duplici praecepto vide ibid. Comment. dub. 7; de scientia ibid. lit. Magistri d. XXIII. c. 3, et Comment. a. 2; de conscientia et synderesi agitur ibid. d. 39. per totam; de gratia vide ibid. lit. Magistri, d. XXIV. c. 1. seq., d. XXIX. c. 1, et Comment. ibid. a. 1-3. — Inferius pro *sibi* A *ei*, et, pro *sufficienter* C *sufficientiam*.

en: Gen. 1:28. — The following passage is ibid. 2:17. — Below, reference is made to Ps. 36:27: *Turn away from evil and do good.* — On the twofold good compare II *Sent.*, the Master's text, d. XX, c. 6; on the twofold precept see ibid. the Commentary, dubium 7; on knowledge, ibid. the Master's text d. XXIII, c. 3, and the Commentary a. 2; on conscience and synderesis the matter is treated ibid. d. 39, throughout; on grace see ibid. the Master's text, d. XXIV, c. 1 and following, d. XXIX, c. 1, and the Commentary ibid. a. 1–3. — Below, for *sibi* A [reads] *ei*, and for *sufficienter* C [reads] *sufficientiam*.

la: C D G O Q *rediretur* [N *redirent*] *in Deum*. Aliquanto inferius pro *universitatis* 1 *universi*.

en: C D G O Q [read] *rediretur* [N *redirent*] *in Deum*. Somewhat below, for *universitatis* edition 1 [reads] *universi*.

la: Ezech. 2, 9. Cfr. Apoc. 5, 1. — Eadem expositio habetur apud Hug. a S. Vict., I. de Sacram. p. VI. c. 5, in quo agitur de duplici sensu animae. — Mox pro *mundi* edd. cum aliquot codd. *generis humani*.

en: Ezek. 2:9. Compare Apoc. 5:1. — The same exposition is found in Hugh of St. Victor, I *On the Sacraments*, p. VI, c. 5, in which the twofold sense of the soul is treated. — Just below, for *mundi* the editions, with some codices, [read] *generis humani*.

la: Vide II. Sent. d. 24. p. II. dub. 3. — De seq. propositione cfr. ibid. pag. 604, nota 5.

en: See II *Sent.* d. 24, p. II, dubium 3. — On the following proposition compare ibid. p. 604, note 5.

la: Hugo a S. Vict., I. de Sacram. p. VI. c. 6. Textus originalis plura interserit. Ibid. et c. 7. fusius exhibentur quae mox de duobus praeceptis proponuntur. De praecepto disciplinae ad *obedientiam* hominis probandam cfr. II. Sent. d. 17. dub. 5, et August., VIII. de Gen. ad lit. c. 6. n. 12. — B *inquireretur*, edd., excepta 2, *acquireretur*.

en: Hugh of St. Victor, I *On the Sacraments*, p. VI, c. 6. The original text inserts more. Ibid. and in c. 7 the things proposed just below about the two precepts are set out more fully. On the precept of discipline for the proving of man's *obedience* compare II *Sent.* d. 17, dubium 5, and Augustine, VIII *On Genesis to the Letter* c. 6, n. 12. — B [reads] *inquireretur*; the editions, edition 2 excepted, *acquireretur*.

la: Edd., excepta 2, *suo autem demerito* (!).

en: The editions, edition 2 excepted, [read] *suo autem demerito* (!).

la: Edd., excepta 2, *rectitudo synderesis*. Superius voci *adiutorium* B praefigit *beneficium sive*.

en: The editions, edition 2 excepted, [read] *rectitudo synderesis*. Above, before the word *adiutorium*, B prefixes *beneficium sive*.

la: Respicitur Matth. 22, 37. seqq. — Inferius post *non* 1, 3 cum nonnullis codd. addunt *aliunde*, et pro *obedire* S substituit *obedientiae regimen*.

en: Reference is made to Matt. 22:37 and following. — Below, after *non*, editions 1 and 3, with some codices, add *aliunde*; and for *obedire* S substitutes *obedientiae regimen*.

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin base from the IA djvu raw (L43152–43307), verified against the 450 dpi column bands of pp.229–230. Gutters auto-measured: **p.229 = 1222** (53 px run, carried over from c10), **p.230 = 1361** (60 px run).

**Page span.** Cap. XI opens partway down **p.229's left** column at the `Cap. XI.` heading, runs that column and the whole of p.229's **right**, and closes after five lines of **p.230's left** column at `…quia obedire contempsit`, immediately above the `Cap. XII.` heading. Three column-runs. Boundary taken from the next heading.

**Apparatus (9 entries).** p.229's whole register — nn. 1–8 — is this chapter's, the left footer carrying nn. 1–3 and the right nn. 4–8. **p.229 is fully consumed.** p.230 n. 1 anchors on `proximum sicut se ipsum` in the tail here; p.230 nn. 2–5 stand in that page's left footer, were read here in passing, and are forwarded to c12 quoted in full.

**Runover — NEGATIVE, tested from both sides.** p.229's left footer closes with n. 3 at `…pro universitatis 1 universi.` — a complete entry — **and** the right footer opens with a numbered `⁴ Ezech. 2, 9.` This chunk's verdict is recorded in `manual-review/vol5-runover-ledger.tsv`; totals come from `tools/check-vol5-census.py`.

**⚠ Five raw corruptions in one footer register, four of them digits or sigla.** This page's apparatus is the densest concentration of raw error met so far in Pars II, and every one of them would have passed silently into the text:
- n. 3's opening siglum string is **`C D G O Q`**; the raw gives `C D (1 O Q`, turning `G` into an opening parenthesis and a `1`. An unchecked read would have invented a bracketed variant that does not exist.
- n. 2's `Seq. locus est ibid. 2, 17` is **17**, not the raw's `2, 47`; and its `Comment. ibid. a. 1-3` is **1-3**, not `a. 4-3` — which is not even a well-formed range, and is the sort of tell worth pausing on.
- n. 5's `pag. 604, nota 5` — the raw's `nota S`.
- n. 6's `II. Sent. d. 17. dub. 5` — the raw's `dub. S`; and its variant siglum is **B** (`B inquireretur`), where the raw gives `D`.

**Readings settled off the bands.** n. 7's `(!)` is Quaracchi's own editorial exclamation, printed in the footer against the editions' *suo autem demerito*; kept as printed. n. 1's `Retinuimus cum Vat., 1 et 3` — the numerals are edition sigla, not chapter numbers. No `[?]` flags.

**Marginalia** (trimmed from body, body order): p.229 L — "Theses quinque." · "Ratio." · "Duplex liber." · "Duplex sensus." · "Duplex motus." p.229 R — "Duplex bonum." · "Duplex praeceptum." · "Quid mera obedientia." · "Quadruplex adiutorium." · "De synderesi." · "Duplex gratia." p.230 L carries none on this chapter's five-line tail; "Liber cum triplici gradu expressionis." belongs to Cap. XII.

**Hand-offs.**
- *Picked up:* **nothing** — c10 forwarded none, p.229 opening a fresh register.
- *Forwarded to `bon-brev-p2-c12`:* p.230 footer notes **2, 3, 4 and 5**, all four standing in p.230's **left** footer band and all four already read here — `² Vide I. Sent. d. 3. p. I. q. 2; p. II. a. 1. q. 1. ad 5. et II. Sent. d. 16. a. 2. q. 3. — Pro summum nonnulli codd., ut I L M, suum.` · `³ B H P Q causativum. — De his cfr. supra pag. 24. col. I.` · `⁴ Cfr. IV. Sent. d. 49. p. I. q. 5. in corp.` · `⁵ Gen. 1, 3. seqq. Cfr. August., II. de Gen. ad lit. c. 8. n. 16-20; IV. c. 29. n. 46. et c. 31. n. 48. Vide etiam supra pag. 204, nota 9.` — **do not re-read them.** ⚠ **p.230's total is NOT yet established**: only its left footer has been read, and its right footer is unread. c12 must read the right footer and register p.230's true total in `tools/check-vol5-apparatus.py`'s `KNOWN_TOTALS`. Cap. XII (*De completione et ordinatione totius mundi consummati*) opens in **p.230's left** column at the `Cap. XII.` heading (raw **L43308**), text beginning `Ex praedictis autem colligi potest, quod creatura mundi est quasi quidam liber, in quo relucet, repraesentatur et legitur Trinitas fabricatrix…`, with its first anchor at `…ascendere in summum principium, quod est Deus²`. **c12 is the LAST capitulum of Pars II** (raw ends at L43447, where Pars III's `Cap. I.` begins) — so its close is both the pars boundary and **the next DEPLOY boundary**; clear the parked list in the resume note then. p.230 bands are generated (gutter 1361); p.231 is not yet extracted.

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


title: Pars 2, Cap. 12

source_text:
<!-- page 230 -->

### Capitulum XII. *De completione et ordinatione totius mundi consummati.*

Ex praedictis autem colligi potest, quod creatura mundi est quasi quidam *liber*, in quo relucet, repraesentatur et legitur Trinitas fabricatrix secundum triplicem gradum expressionis, scilicet per modum *vestigii*, *imaginis* et *similitudinis*; ita quod ratio *vestigii* reperitur in omnibus creaturis, ratio *imaginis* in solis intellectualibus seu spiritibus rationalibus, ratio *similitudinis* in solis deiformibus; ex quibus quasi per quosdam scalares gradus intellectus humanus natus est gradatim ascendere in summum principium, quod est Deus[^p230-2].

Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia, cum omnes creaturae respectum habeant et dependentiam ad suum Creatorem, tripliciter ad ipsum comparari possunt, scilicet aut sicut ad *principium creativum*[^p230-3], aut sicut ad *obiectum motivum*, aut sicut ad *donum inhabitativum*. Primo modo comparatur ad ipsum omnis eius *effectus*, secundo modo omnis *intellectus*, tertio modo omnis *spiritus iustus et Deo acceptus*. Omnis enim *effectus*, quantumcumque parum habens de *esse*, habet Deum sicut principium. Omnis *intellectus*, quantumcumque parum habens de lumine, natus est per cognitionem et amorem capere Deum. Omnis autem *spiritus iustus et sanctus* habet donum Spiritus sancti sibi infusum.

Et quoniam creatura habere non potest Deum sicut *principium*, quin *configuretur* ei secundum unitatem, veritatem et bonitatem; nec Deum sicut *obiectum*, quin eum *capiat* per memoriam, intelligentiam et voluntatem; nec Deum sicut *donum infusum*, quin *configuretur* ei per fidem, spem et caritatem, seu triplicem dotem[^p230-4]; et prima conformitas est longinqua, secunda propinqua et tertia proxima: hinc est, quod prima dicitur *vestigium* Trinitatis, secunda *imago* et tertia *similitudo*.

Est igitur spiritus rationalis medius inter primam et ultimam, ita quod primam habet inferius, secundam interius, tertiam superius. Et ideo in statu innocentiae, cum imago non erat vitiata, sed deiformis effecta per gratiam, sufficiebat *liber creaturae*, in quo se ipsum exerceret homo ad contuendum lumen divinae sapientiae; ut sic sapiens esset, cum universas res videret *in se*, videret *in proprio genere*, videret etiam *in arte*; secundum quod res tripliciter habent *esse*, scilicet in *materia* vel natura propria, in *intelligentia creata* et in *arte aeterna*; secundum quae tria dicit Scriptura[^p230-5]: *Dixit Deus: fiat; fecit, et factum est*.

Propter quam triplicem visionem triplicem homo accepit oculum, sicut dicit Hugo de sancto Victore[^p230-6], scilicet *carnis*, *rationis* et *contemplationis*: oculum *carnis*, quo videret mundum et ea quae sunt in mundo; oculum *rationis*, quo videret animum et ea quae sunt in animo; oculum *contemplationis*, quo videret Deum et ea quae sunt in Deo; et sic oculo *carnis* videret homo ea quae sunt extra se, oculo *rationis* ea quae sunt intra se, et oculo *contemplationis* ea quae sunt supra se. Qui quidem oculus *contemplationis* actum suum non habet perfectum nisi per gloriam, quam amittit per culpam, recuperat autem per gratiam et fidem[^p230-7] et Scripturarum intelligentiam, quibus mens humana purgatur, illuminatur et perficitur ad caelestia contemplanda; ad quae lapsus homo pervenire non potest, nisi prius defectus et tenebras proprias recognoscat; quod non facit, nisi consideret et attendat ruinam humanae naturae.

english:
### Chapter XII. *On the completion and ordering of the whole consummated world.*

From the foresaid, moreover, it can be gathered that the creation of the world is a kind of *book* in which the fabricating Trinity shines forth, is represented and is read, according to a threefold grade of expression — namely, by way of *vestige*, of *image* and of *likeness*; in such a way that the character of a *vestige* is found in all creatures, the character of an *image* only in intellectual beings or rational spirits, and the character of a *likeness* only in the deiform. And from these, as by certain ladder-like steps, the human intellect is born to ascend by degrees to the highest principle, which is God[^p230-2].

Now the reason for the understanding of the foresaid is this: that since all creatures have a relation and a dependence upon their Creator, they can be compared to him in three ways — namely, either as to a *creative principle*[^p230-3], or as to a *motive object*, or as to an *indwelling gift*. In the first way every effect of his is compared to him; in the second way every *intellect*; in the third way every *spirit just and acceptable to God*. For every *effect*, however little it has of *being*, has God as its principle. Every *intellect*, however little it has of light, is born to grasp God through knowledge and love. And every *just and holy spirit* has the gift of the Holy Spirit infused into it.

And since a creature cannot have God as its *principle* without being *configured* to him according to unity, truth and goodness; nor God as its *object* without *grasping* him through memory, intelligence and will; nor God as an *infused gift* without being *configured* to him through faith, hope and charity, or the threefold dowry[^p230-4]; and since the first conformity is remote, the second near and the third nearest: hence it is that the first is called the *vestige* of the Trinity, the second the *image*, and the third the *likeness*.

The rational spirit, therefore, is midway between the first and the last, in such a way that it has the first below it, the second within it, and the third above it. And therefore in the state of innocence, when the image was not vitiated but made deiform through grace, the *book of creation* sufficed, in which man might exercise himself in beholding the light of divine wisdom — so that he might be wise in this way: seeing all things *in themselves*, seeing them *in their proper genus*, and seeing them also *in the art*; according as things have *being* in three ways, namely in *matter* or their proper nature, in *created intelligence*, and in the *eternal art*. And according to these three Scripture says[^p230-5]: *God said: let it be made; he made it, and it was made*.

On account of which threefold vision man received a threefold eye, as Hugh of St. Victor says[^p230-6] — namely, of the *flesh*, of *reason* and of *contemplation*: the eye of the *flesh*, by which he might see the world and the things that are in the world; the eye of *reason*, by which he might see the mind and the things that are in the mind; the eye of *contemplation*, by which he might see God and the things that are in God. And thus by the eye of the *flesh* man would see the things that are outside himself; by the eye of *reason*, the things that are within himself; and by the eye of *contemplation*, the things that are above himself. And this eye of *contemplation* does not have its act in perfection except through glory — which it loses through guilt, but recovers through grace and faith[^p230-7] and the understanding of the Scriptures, by which the human mind is purged, illumined and perfected for the contemplation of heavenly things; to which fallen man cannot attain unless he first recognize his own defects and darkness; which he does not do unless he consider and attend to the ruin of human nature.

la: Vide I. Sent. d. 3. p. I. q. 2; p. II. a. 1. q. 1. ad 5. et II. Sent. d. 16. a. 2. q. 3. — Pro *summum* nonnulli codd., ut I L M, *suum*.

en: See I *Sent.* d. 3, p. I, q. 2; p. II, a. 1, q. 1, ad 5; and II *Sent.* d. 16, a. 2, q. 3. — For *summum* some codices, such as I L M, [read] *suum*.

la: B H P Q *causativum*. — De his cfr. supra pag. 24. col. I.

en: B H P Q [read] *causativum*. — On these compare above, p. 24, col. I.

la: Cfr. IV. Sent. d. 49. p. I. q. 5. in corp.

en: Compare IV *Sent.* d. 49, p. I, q. 5, in the body.

la: Gen. 1, 3. seqq. Cfr. August., II. de Gen. ad lit. c. 8. n. 16-20; IV. c. 29. n. 46. et c. 31. n. 48. Vide etiam supra pag. 204, nota 9.

en: Gen. 1:3 and following. Compare Augustine, II *On Genesis to the Letter* c. 8, nn. 16–20; IV, c. 29, n. 46, and c. 31, n. 48. See also above, p. 204, note 9.

la: Libr. I. de Sacram. p. X. c. 2. — Pro *animum* et *animo* A *animam* et *anima* (textus originalis *se ipsam* et *ipsa*).

en: Book I *On the Sacraments*, p. X, c. 2. — For *animum* and *animo* A [reads] *animam* and *anima* (the original text: *se ipsam* and *ipsa*).

la: Hugo a S. Vict., loc. cit.: *Postquam autem tenebrae peccati in illam* [animam] *intraverunt, oculus quidem contemplationis exstinctus est, ut nihil videret... Fides ergo necessaria est, qua credantur quae non videntur* etc. — Mox respiciuntur tres actus hierarchici, scil. purgare etc.; cfr. supra pag. 225, nota 6. — Pro *et sic* post *Deo* I L Q *ut sic*, B *ut sicut*; deinde pro *amittit* edd., excepta 2, *amisit*, quae etiam in fine cap. cum uno alteroque cod. *diligenter*.

en: Hugh of St. Victor, at the place cited: *But after the darkness of sin entered into it* [the soul], *the eye of contemplation was indeed extinguished, so that it saw nothing… Faith, therefore, is necessary, by which those things may be believed which are not seen*, etc. — Just below, reference is made to the three hierarchic acts, namely to purge, etc.; compare above, p. 225, note 6. — For *et sic* after *Deo* I L Q [read] *ut sic*, B *ut sicut*; then, for *amittit*, the editions, edition 2 excepted, [read] *amisit*, which also at the end of the chapter, with one or another codex, [read] *diligenter*.

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin base from the IA djvu raw (L43308–43446), verified against the 450 dpi column bands of p.230. Gutter auto-measured: **p.230 = 1361** (60 px run).

**Page span — a single printed page, both columns.** Cap. XII opens five lines down **p.230's left** column at the `Cap. XII.` heading and closes at the foot of p.230's **right** column at `…attendat ruinam humanae naturae`. Nothing follows it on the page; **PARS TERTIA opens on p.231** (raw L43447). The first chunk of Pars II to sit entirely inside one printed page.

**Apparatus (6 entries).** p.230 nn. 2–5 inherited from c11's hand-off, quoted there in full and **not re-read**; nn. 6–7 read here off that page's **right** footer band. **This establishes p.230's total at 7 and the page is now fully consumed** (n. 1 by c11, nn. 2–7 here). `KNOWN_TOTALS` updated accordingly — the `?? NOT IN KNOWN_TOTALS` warning c11 left standing is now discharged.

**Runover — NEGATIVE, tested from both sides.** p.230's left footer closes with n. 5 at `…Vide etiam supra pag. 204, nota 9.` — a complete entry — **and** the right footer opens with a numbered `⁶ Libr. I. de Sacram.` This chunk's verdict is recorded in `manual-review/vol5-runover-ledger.tsv`; totals come from `tools/check-vol5-census.py`.

**⚠ The raw's `223` for `225` has now happened TWICE, in the same kind of note.** n. 7's `cfr. supra pag. 225, nota 6` is given by the raw as `pag. 223`, exactly as p.228 n. 7's was. Both are Quaracchi back-references to the p.225 register, and both would have pointed a reader at the firmament notes on p.223 instead. **Treat `22x` in a Vol V back-reference as unread until it is on the band** — and test it against sense: p.225 n. 6 is the Dionysian *triplex actus hierarchicus* note (purgare, illuminare, perficere), which is precisely what this footer says it is pointing at. n. 4's `IV. Sent. d. 49. p. I. q. 5` is likewise **q. 5**, not the raw's `q. 3`.

**Readings settled off the bands.** n. 3's `B H P Q` is the **fourth** instance of raw `II` for `H` in five pages (after p.226 n. 5, p.227 n. 5, p.228 n. 9); its `pag. 24. col. I` is a reference to the volume's Prolegomena, whose pages are set in one column-numbered sequence — not a misread. In n. 7 the sigla are `I L Q` (raw: `\LQ`) and the variant is `ut sicut` (raw: `til Sicut`). No `[?]` flags.

**Marginalia** (trimmed from body, body order): p.230 L — "Liber cum triplici gradu expressionis." · "Ratio." · "Triplex comparatio ad Deum." p.230 R — "Vestigium, imago, similitudo." · "Rationalis spiritus est medius." · "Triplex visio." · "Triplex oculus." · "Notandum."

**Hand-offs.**
- *Picked up (from `bon-brev-p2-c11`):* p.230 footer notes **2, 3, 4 and 5**, quoted in full in c11's Notes. p.230 is now fully consumed.
- *Forwarded:* **nothing.** ★ **This chunk closes PARS II** — twelve capitula, printed pp. 219–230, all Tier 2, and pp. 219–230 are now fully consumed with no note owned by nobody. The next front is **PARS TERTIA, *De corruptela peccati***, opening on **p.231** at `PARS TERTIA.` / `Cap. I.` / *De origine mali in communi* (raw **L43447**). Its first chunk is `bon-brev-p3-c1`, and per the frozen convention the part opening (`PARS TERTIA` + subtitle) folds into that chunk. p.231 is not yet extracted, and the pars's capitulum count must be verified against the volume's own index (raw L93795–93829) before chunking, per-pars as always.


title: Pars 3, Cap. 1

title_alt:
De origine mali in communi
On the origin of evil in general

source_text:
<!-- page 231 -->

### PARS TERTIA.

### *De corruptela peccati.*

### Capitulum I. *De origine mali in communi.*

Praedeterminatis igitur aliquibus breviter de Trinitate Dei et creatura mundi, restat nunc, aliqua breviter tangere de corruptela peccati. De qua in summa tenendum est, quod peccatum non est *essentia* aliqua, sed *defectus et corruptela*, qua scilicet corrumpitur *modus, species* et *ordo* in voluntate creata[^p231-1]; ac per hoc corruptio peccati est ipsi bono *contraria*, nec tamen habet *esse* nisi in bono nec *ortum* trahit nisi a bono, quod quidem est liberum voluntatis arbitrium; et ipsum nec est summe malum, cum possit velle bonum; nec summe bonum, cum possit declinare in malum.

Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia primum principium, cum sit ens *a se ipso*, non ab alio, necesse est, quod sit ens *propter se ipsum*, ac per hoc summe bonum, nullum prorsus habens defectum. Non est igitur aliquid nec esse potest, quod sit primum et summe malum, quia primum principium dicit summum *complementum*, et summum malum *defectum* dicit permaximum. Quoniam igitur primum principium, ut summe ens et completum[^p231-2], nec deficere potest in essendo nec in operando; nec *summe* malum est nec *aliquod* malum est nec aliquo modo malum *principiare* potest. — Quia tamen omnipotens est, potest bonum de *non-esse* in *esse* deducere, etiam sine adminiculo alicuius materiae. Quod et fecit, cum creaturam finxit, cui dedit *esse, vivere, intelligere* et *velle*; quae quidem, quia a summo bono fuit secundum triplicis causae habitudinem[^p231-3]; oportuit, quod haberet in sua substantia et voluntate *modum, speciem* et *ordinem*. Nata ergo fuit agere opera sua *a Deo* et *secundum Deum* et *propter Deum*, et hoc secundum modum, speciem et ordinem sibi insitum.

Sed quia de nihilo fuit et defectiva, potuit *deficere* ab agendo *propter Deum*, ut aliquid faceret propter *se*, non propter Deum, ac per hoc nec *a Deo* nec *secundum Deum* nec *propter Deum*; et hoc est *peccatum*, quod est *modi, speciei* et *ordinis* corruptivum; quod, quia defectus est, non habet causam *efficientem*, sed *deficientem*, videlicet defectum voluntatis creatae[^p231-4].

Quia vero corruptio est et non nisi boni; et omnis corruptio in re corruptibili est: ideo non est nisi in bono; ac per hoc, cum voluntas libera corrumpat in se ipsa modum, speciem et ordinem, deficiendo a vero bono, peccatum omne in quantum huiusmodi et est *a voluntate*, sicut a prima origine, et est *in voluntate*, sicut in proprio subiecto; quod quidem facit voluntas, quando sua defectibilitate, mutabilitate et vertibilitate, spreto bono indeficiente et incommutabili, bono commutabili inhaerescit[^p231-5].

Ex quibus colligitur, quod « peccatum non est appetitio malarum rerum, sed desertio meliorum »; et ideo in appetitu voluntatis est *modi, speciei et ordinis corruptivum*, ac per hoc « adeo voluntarium, quod si non est voluntarium, iam non est peccatum ». — His autem praeintellectis, manifeste cadit impietas Manichaeorum[^p231-6] ponentium summe malum omnium malorum principium primum. Apparet etiam, quae sit mali origo, et quid sit mali subiectum.

---

english:
### PART THREE.

### *On the corruption of sin.*

### Chapter I. *On the origin of evil in general.*

Some things, therefore, having been determined beforehand and briefly concerning the Trinity of God and the creature of the world, it remains now to touch briefly upon some things concerning the corruption of sin. Concerning which this is to be held in summary: that sin is not any *essence*, but a *defect and corruption*, by which, namely, *mode, species* and *order* are corrupted in the created will[^p231-1]; and through this the corruption of sin is *contrary* to the good itself, and yet it has *being* only in the good, nor does it draw its *rise* except from a good — which good is indeed free will; and free will is neither supremely evil, since it can will the good, nor supremely good, since it can turn aside into evil.

Now the reason for the understanding of the foresaid is this: since the first principle, being a being *of itself*, not from another, must necessarily be a being *for the sake of itself*, and through this supremely good, having absolutely no defect. There is not, therefore, nor can there be, anything which is a first and supreme evil, because the first principle bespeaks the highest *completion*, while the supreme evil bespeaks the very greatest *defect*. Since therefore the first principle, as supremely being and complete[^p231-2], can fail neither in being nor in operating; it is neither *supremely* evil nor is it *any* evil, nor can it in any way *give origin to* evil. — Yet because it is omnipotent, it can lead the good from *non-being* into *being*, even without the aid of any matter. And this it did when it fashioned the creature, to which it gave *to be, to live, to understand* and *to will*; and since these came from the supreme good according to the disposition of a threefold cause[^p231-3], it was fitting that the creature should have in its substance and will *mode, species* and *order*. It was born, therefore, to do its works *from God* and *according to God* and *for the sake of God*, and this according to the mode, species and order implanted in it.

But because it was out of nothing and defectible, it was able to *fail* in acting *for the sake of God*, so as to do something for the sake of *itself*, not for the sake of God, and through this neither *from God* nor *according to God* nor *for the sake of God*; and this is *sin*, which is destructive of *mode, species* and *order*; and sin, because it is a defect, does not have an *efficient* cause, but a *deficient* one, namely the defect of the created will[^p231-4].

But because it is a corruption, and only of a good; and every corruption is in a corruptible thing: therefore it is only in a good; and through this, since the free will corrupts in its very self mode, species and order by failing away from the true good, every sin as such both is *from the will*, as from its first origin, and is *in the will*, as in its proper subject; and this indeed the will does when, by its defectibility, mutability and vertibility, spurning the unfailing and unchangeable good, it clings to a changeable good[^p231-5].

From these things it is gathered that « sin is not the seeking of evil things, but the deserting of better ones »; and therefore in the appetite of the will it is *destructive of mode, species and order*, and through this « so voluntary that, if it is not voluntary, it is not yet sin ». — And these things having been understood beforehand, the impiety of the Manichees[^p231-6] manifestly falls, who posit a supreme evil as the first principle of all evils. It also appears what the origin of evil is, and what the subject of evil is.

---

la: August., XI. de Civ. Dei, c. 9: Mali enim nulla natura est, sed amissio boni *mali* nomen accepit. Lib. de Natura boni, c. 4: Quod [malum] nihil aliud est quam corruptio vel modi, vel speciei, vel ordinis naturalis. — De hoc cap. cfr. II. Sent. d. 25. p. II. q. 3; d. 34. et 35. per totam. — Superius voci *essentia* B praefigit *natura vel*.

en: Augustine, *City of God* XI, c. 9: For evil has no nature, but the loss of good has received the name *evil*. *Book on the Nature of the Good*, c. 4: Which [evil] is nothing else than the corruption either of mode, or of species, or of natural order. — On this chapter compare II *Sent.* d. 25, p. II, q. 3; d. 34 and 35 throughout. — Above, before the word *essentia* B prefixes *natura vel*.

la: S *ut summe ens, ut summe bonum et complementum*, qui etiam inferius voci *omnipotens* praemittit *spiritus*. Subinde pro *deducere* plures codd. *producere*, A *reducere*, P *ducere*.

en: S reads *ut summe ens, ut summe bonum et complementum*; and further below it also places *spiritus* before the word *omnipotens*. Thereupon, for *deducere* several codices have *producere*, A *reducere*, P *ducere*.

la: Scil. efficientis, formalis seu exemplaris et finalis; cfr. I. Sent. d. 3. p. I. dub. 3.

en: Namely, of the efficient, the formal or exemplary, and the final [cause]; cf. I *Sent.* d. 3, p. I, dub. 3.

la: August., XII. de Civ. Dei, c. 7: Nemo igitur quaerat efficientem causam malae voluntatis. Non enim est efficiens, sed deficiens.

en: Augustine, *City of God* XII, c. 7: Let no one, therefore, seek an efficient cause of an evil will. For it is not efficient, but deficient.

la: Ut insinuat August., II. de Lib. Arb. c. 19. n. 53. Cfr. II. Sent. d. 35. dub. 6, ubi etiam seq. definitio peccati ab August., de Natura boni, c. 34. et 36, data affertur. Subinde proponitur sententia August., de Vera Relig. c. 14. n. 27; de qua vide supra pag. 188, nota 6.

en: As Augustine intimates, *On Free Choice* II, c. 19, n. 53. Cf. II *Sent.* d. 35, dub. 6, where also the following definition of sin, given by Augustine in *On the Nature of the Good*, c. 34 and 36, is adduced. Thereupon there is set forth the opinion of Augustine, *On True Religion* c. 14, n. 27; on which see above, p. 188, note 6.

translators_notes:
**★ This chunk opens Pars III** (*De corruptela peccati*), the Breviloquium's third part. The `PARS TERTIA` heading and its subtitle are folded into this capitulum per the established short-opener rule, exactly as the Pars I and Pars II openings were folded into their c1 chunks. They are set as `###`, not `##`: `tools/check-vol5-apparatus.py`'s `section()` stops at the next `## ` heading and would otherwise read an empty body.

**Pars III structure, verified against the volume's own index** (raw L93816–93860): **11 capitula** — I *De origine mali in communi* · II *De primorum parentum tentatione* · III *De primorum parentum transgressione* · IV *De primorum parentum punitione* · V *De originalis peccati corruptione* · VI *De originalis peccati transfusione* · VII *De originalis peccati curatione* · VIII *De origine peccatorum actualium* · IX *De origine et distinctione capitalium peccatorum* · X *De origine et qualitate peccatorum poenalium* · XI *De origine peccatorum finalium, quae sunt peccata in Spiritum sanctum*. Index opening pages: c1 231 · c2 231 (*ib.*) · c3 232 · c4 233 · c5 234 · c6 235 · c7 236 · c8 236 (*ib.*), the rest continuing. The index gives opening pages only — establish every span positively from the next `Cap.` heading on the bands.

**Provenance.** Latin base from the IA djvu raw (L43447–43520), verified line-by-line against the 450 dpi column bands of p.231. **The raw for p.231 is clean** — normal serif garbles (`essc`, `hajjet`, `nee`, `liijerum`, `moilus`) but no cascade fragmentation of the body, so it served as the transcription base with the bands as the check. (Its footer block is a different matter: usable as a hint only, and wrong in at least two digits — see below.)

**Gutter measured at x≈1194** (low-ink run 53 px, page 2571×3823). p.231 opens a part and therefore carries the full-width `PARS TERTIA` display heading across the gutter, which is the layout that defeated the measurement on p.201 and p.219 — but here the body-rows window still returned a healthy 53 px run, well inside the sound range, and the bands were confirmed visually before use (both columns cropped clean, no bleed either way). No parity reasoning was used; the parity model is spent.

**Page span.** The whole of Cap. I sits on p.231. It opens in the **left** column beneath the part heading and closes in the **right** at `…et quid sit mali subiectum.`, immediately above the `Cap. II.` heading — established positively from that heading, not from white space. The body text crosses the gutter mid-word (`potuit de- | ficere`). The running head reads `PARS III. C. I. II.`, naming the page's **last** capitulum per the standing rule.

**Apparatus (6 entries).** p.231 carries **seven** footer notes in total, all read off the bands (the raw has no numerals). Anchors: `creata`¹, `completum`², `habitudinem`³, `voluntatis creatae`⁴, `inhaerescit`⁵, `Manichaeorum`⁶ — all six in Cap. I; `poena inflicta`⁷ in Cap. II. The left footer block holds nn. 1–3 and the right holds nn. 4–7, which on this page happens to coincide with the column division — but that is a coincidence of this page, not a rule (pp. 220, 221, 226 all had a left-block note whose anchor was in the right column).

**Runover — NEGATIVE, tested from both sides.** The left footer's last entry, n. 3, closes on a complete clause (`…cfr. I. Sent. d. 3. p. I. dub. 3.`) and the right footer opens with a *numbered* entry `⁴`; no unnumbered fragment stands at the head of the right block. The page's last entry, n. 7, likewise closes complete (`…de actuali c. 8-11.`) and belongs to c2, which will re-test it against p.232's footer.

**Digits and sigla settled off the bands.** n. 1's `II. Sent. d. 25.` — **the raw prints `d. 23`; the band shows 25** (the chronic serif `3`/`5` family, same class as p.228 n. 8's `c. 23`→`c. 25`). n. 2's `A reducere` — the raw flattens the siglum to `X`. n. 5's `c. 19. n. 53` (raw `c. 1 9. n. S3`), `de Vera Relig. c. 14. n. 27` and `pag. 188` — all serif `1`s that print like `4`; c. 14 n. 27 is independently right, since that is where Augustine's *adeo voluntarium…* definition stands. n. 6's `d. 1.` prints as `d. 4.` in the same serif. No `[?]` flags.

**Body readings settled off the bands.** `ens a se ipso` (raw fuses it to `en^a se ipso`); `finxit` (raw `fmxit`); `principiare` (raw `principiare` confirmed italic). In the corollary the two Augustine quotations are set in **roman inside Quaracchi's `« »`**, while `modi, speciei et ordinis corruptivum` between them is italic; that alternation is preserved as printed and is not an oversight.

**Marginalia** (Quaracchi editorial side-glosses, trimmed from the body per corpus convention; logged here in body order). p.231 L — "De peccato in genere." · "Ratio." · "Non est primum et summe malum." · "Nec Deus malum facere potest." · "Creavit bonum, quod haberet tria in substantia et voluntate." p.231 R — "Quomodo fiat defectus et peccatum." · "Non est nisi a bono et in bono." · "Corollarium." · "Cadit error Manichaeorum."

**Hand-offs.**
- *Picked up:* **NONE.** Clean start — `bon-brev-p2-c12` consumed p.230 entirely and p.231 opens a new part; confirmed from both sides.
- *Forwarded to `bon-brev-p3-c2`:* p.231 footer note **7**, anchored on `poena inflicta`⁷ in Cap. II — "De his tribus agitur in hoc et 2 seqq. capp.; de peccato originali c. 5-7; de actuali c. 8-11." Cap. II opens in p.231's **right** column at `Cap. II. De primorum parentum tentatione.` and its body is **not** complete on p.231 (it breaks at `…poena inflicta⁷.` and continues on p.232, whose running head reads `BREVILOQUII PARS III. C. III.`, so p.232 also carries Cap. III). c2 must therefore derive its span from both pages and re-test n. 7 against p.232's footer for a page-crossing runover.


title: Pars 3, Cap. 2

title_alt:
De primorum parentum tentatione
On the temptation of the first parents

source_text:
<!-- page 231 -->

### Capitulum II. *De primorum parentum tentatione.*

Ad intelligendum autem, qualiter corruptela peccati introivit in mundum, considerare oportet *lapsum* primi parentis, *traductionem* culpae originalis et *ortum* seu radicem peccati actualis. — Circa *lapsum* igitur primi parentis haec tria nobis consideranda occurrunt, scilicet *tentatio* diabolica, *culpa* commissa et *poena* inflicta[^p231-7].

<!-- page 232 -->

Haec autem de *tentatione* tenenda sunt, quod cum Deus hominem condidisset in felicitate paradisi in duplici sexu, virili scilicet et muliebri; diabolus invidens homini, assumta specie serpentina, aggressus est mulierem, primo *quaerendo: Cur praecepit vobis Deus, ne comederetis*[^p232-1]? secundo *asserendo: Nequaquam moriemini;* tertio *promittendo: Eritis sicut dii, scientes bonum et malum;* volens ista tentatione deiicere mulierem infirmiorem et per illam postea prosternere sexum virilem; quod et fecit, Domino permittente.

Ratio autem ad intelligentiam praedictorum haec est: quia, sicut primum principium est potentissimum in producendo, sic etiam est rectissimum in gubernando; et ideo « res, quas condidit, ita administrat, ut tamen eas agere proprios motus sinat[^p232-2] ». Quoniam ergo homo sic factus erat, ut per victoriam pugnae perveniret ad praemium quietis aeternae; licet Deus sciret, hominem tentationi succumbere, debuit tamen permittere, hominem tentari ab eo qui *sciret, posset* et *vellet*[^p232-3]. — Quoniam igitur diabolus, qui prius erat sciens et rectus, per superbiam cadendo factus est versutus et invidus; et ideo per invidiam tentare *volebat* et per astutiam *sciebat:* ideo tentavit, iuxta quod *potuit*, et Deus permisit. Quod ergo in tentando speciem serpentinam assumsit, hoc fuit dispensationis divinae, ut non solum posset deprehendi eius versutia, verum etiam ex illa effigie versutia diabolica in tentando innotescere posset cunctis filiis Adae.

Rursus, quod tentavit de praecepto *disciplinae*[^p232-4], hoc similiter fuit dispensationis divinae, ut, sive vinceretur, sive vinceret, cunctis innotesceret meritum obedientiae, sive demeritum inobedientiae. — Quod autem incepit a *muliere*, hoc fuit versutiae suae, quia facilius est deiicere minus fortem; unde versutia hostis ex infirmiori parte aggreditur civitatem.

Similiter *modus*, quo in tentatione processit, magnae fuit versutiae, quia *experiendo, impellendo* et *alliciendo* processit. *Experientiam* enim sumsit in interrogatione, *impulit* in assecuratione, *allexit* autem in promissione. Primo enim *interrogavit* de causa mandati, ut rationem duceret in dubium; secundo, dubitatione habita: *Ne forte moriamur*[^p232-5], *assecuravit*, ut irascibilem duceret in contemptum; tertio, *promisit*, ut concupiscibilem duceret in appetitum, et sic his tribus modis libertatem arbitrii traheret ad consensum, quae facultas est *rationis et voluntatis*, complectens nihilominus tres praedictas vires, rationalem, irascibilem et concupiscibilem[^p232-6]; respectu quarum diabolus allexit mulierem per triplex appetibile, scilicet per *scientiam*, quae est appetibilis rationali; per *excellentiam* ad modum Dei, quae est appetibilis irascibili; per *suavitatem ligni*, quae est appetibilis concupiscibili. Et sic tentavit omne, quod erat in muliere tentabile, per omne illud, per quod poterat in tentationem induci, quod est triplex appetibile mundi, scilicet *concupiscentia carnis, concupiscentia oculorum et superbia vitae*[^p232-7]; secundum quae tria attenditur omnis tentationis origo, sive a mundo, sive a carne, sive a diabolo.

---

english:
### Chapter II. *On the temptation of the first parents.*

Now, in order to understand how the corruption of sin entered into the world, it is necessary to consider the *fall* of the first parent, the *transmission* of original guilt, and the *rise* or root of actual sin. — Concerning the *fall* of the first parent, therefore, these three occur to us as to be considered, namely the diabolical *temptation*, the *guilt* committed, and the *punishment* inflicted[^p231-7].

<!-- page 232 -->

Now these things are to be held concerning the *temptation*: that, when God had established man in the happiness of paradise in a twofold sex, namely the male and the female, the devil, envying man, having assumed the appearance of a serpent, attacked the woman, first by *asking: Why has God commanded you, that you should not eat*[^p232-1]? second by *asserting: You shall by no means die;* third by *promising: You shall be as gods, knowing good and evil;* wishing by this temptation to cast down the woman as the weaker, and afterwards through her to lay low the male sex; which indeed he did, the Lord permitting it.

Now the reason for the understanding of the foresaid is this: since, just as the first principle is most powerful in producing, so also it is most right in governing; and therefore « the things which it has founded it so administers that it nonetheless allows them to perform their own motions[^p232-2] ». Since therefore man had been so made that he should come through the victory of the battle to the reward of eternal rest; although God knew that man would succumb to the temptation, he nevertheless had to permit that man be tempted by one who *would know*, *would be able*, and *would will* it[^p232-3]. — Since therefore the devil, who before was knowing and upright, by falling through pride became crafty and envious; and therefore through envy he *willed* to tempt and through cunning he *knew* how: therefore he tempted, according as he *was able*, and God permitted it. That, then, in tempting he assumed the appearance of a serpent, this was of the divine dispensation, so that not only might his craftiness be detected, but also that from that likeness the diabolical craftiness in tempting might become known to all the sons of Adam.

Again, that he tempted concerning the precept of *discipline*[^p232-4], this likewise was of the divine dispensation, so that, whether he were conquered or should conquer, the merit of obedience, or the demerit of disobedience, might become known to all. — And that he began from the *woman*, this was of his craftiness, because it is easier to cast down the less strong; whence the craftiness of the enemy attacks the city from the weaker side.

Likewise the *manner* in which he proceeded in the temptation was of great craftiness, because he proceeded by *making trial, by impelling* and *by enticing*. For he took his *trial* in the questioning, he *impelled* in the reassuring, and he *enticed* in the promising. For first he *questioned* concerning the cause of the command, that he might lead reason into doubt; second, once doubt was had — *Lest perhaps we die*[^p232-5] — he *reassured*, that he might lead the irascible into contempt; third, he *promised*, that he might lead the concupiscible into appetite, and thus by these three modes might draw the freedom of choice to consent — which faculty is *of reason and of will*, embracing nonetheless the three foresaid powers, the rational, the irascible and the concupiscible[^p232-6]; in respect of which the devil enticed the woman through a threefold desirable object, namely through *knowledge*, which is desirable to the rational; through *excellence* after the manner of God, which is desirable to the irascible; through the *sweetness of the tree*, which is desirable to the concupiscible. And thus he tempted everything that was temptable in the woman, through everything by which she could be led into temptation, which is the threefold desirable object of the world, namely *the concupiscence of the flesh, the concupiscence of the eyes, and the pride of life*[^p232-7]; according to which three the origin of every temptation is reckoned, whether from the world, or from the flesh, or from the devil.

---

la: De his tribus agitur in hoc et 2 seqq. capp.; de peccato originali c. 5-7; de actuali c. 8-11.

en: These three are treated in this and the 2 following chapters; on original sin, c. 5-7; on actual [sin], c. 8-11.

la: Gen. 3, 1. Vulgata *ut non* pro *ne*. — Seq. locus est ibid. v. 4: Nequaquam morte [ita etiam 1] moriemini; tertius ibid. v. 5. — Cfr. II. Sent. lit. Magistri, d. XXI. c. 1. seqq., et Comment. a. 1. q. 1-3.

en: Gen. 3:1. The Vulgate has *ut non* for *ne*. — The following passage is ibid. v. 4: You shall by no means die the death [so also 1]; the third is ibid. v. 5. — Cf. II *Sent.*, the Master's text, d. XXI, c. 1 ff., and the Commentary on the same, a. 1, q. 1-3.

la: August., VII. de Civ. Dei, c. 30. Cfr. supra pag. 218, nota 5. — Superius ante *in producendo* edd., excepta 2, ponunt *in operando sive*.

en: Augustine, *City of God* VII, c. 30. Cf. above, p. 218, note 5. — Above, before *in producendo*, the editions, except 2, place *in operando sive*.

la: Vide II. Sent. lit. Magistri, d. XXIII. c. 1, et Comment. a. 1. q. 1. seq.

en: See II *Sent.*, the Master's text, d. XXIII, c. 1, and the Commentary on the same, a. 1, q. 1 f.

la: De quo supra p. II. c. 11. — Inferius pro *versutia* V *versutus*.

en: On which see above, p. II, c. 11. — Below, for *versutia* V has *versutus*.

la: Gen. 3, 3. — Paulo ante pro *rationem* P *rationalem*, et aliquanto superius pro *magnae* edd. cum pluribus codd. *maximae*.

en: Gen. 3:3. — A little before, for *rationem* P has *rationalem*, and somewhat above, for *magnae* the editions together with several codices have *maximae*.

la: Vide II. Sent. d. 25. p. I. q. 6. ad 2.

en: See II *Sent.* d. 25, p. I, q. 6, ad 2.

la: Epist. I. Ioan. 2, 16. — De praecedentibus cfr. Gen. 3, 5. seq., et de variis speciebus tentationum vide II. Sent. d. 21. a. 2. et dub. 3. — Edd. cum pluribus codd. *scilicet secundum concupiscentiam carnis, concupiscentiam oculorum et superbiam vitae* (A H et 2 *per* pro *secundum*). Pro *mundi* P *menti*. Superius post *ligni* E addit *vetiti*.

en: I John 2:16. — On the preceding, cf. Gen. 3, 5 f.; and on the various species of temptations see II *Sent.* d. 21, a. 2, and dub. 3. — The editions, together with several codices, read *scilicet secundum concupiscentiam carnis, concupiscentiam oculorum et superbiam vitae* (A, H and 2 have *per* for *secundum*). For *mundi* P has *menti*. Above, after *ligni*, E adds *vetiti*. ---

translators_notes:
**Page span, established positively.** Cap. II opens in the **right** column of p. 231, beneath the close of Cap. I, with the heading `Cap. II. / De primorum parentum tentatione.`, and runs one paragraph to `…poena inflicta⁷.` at the foot of that column. It resumes at the head of p. 232's **left** column (`Haec autem de tentatione tenenda sunt…`), fills that column entirely, crosses the gutter mid-sentence but on a word boundary (the left column's last line is `…ut irascibilem duceret in contemptum; tertio,` and the right column opens `promisit, ut concupiscibilem duceret in appetitum,`), and closes in the right column at `…sive a mundo, sive a carne, sive a diabolo.` **The end is fixed by the `Cap. III.` heading that stands immediately below it on the same page**, not by white space at a column foot. p. 232 therefore ends mid-page for this chunk: everything from `Cap. III. / De primorum parentum transgressione.` onward is `bon-brev-p3-c3`'s. The running head reads `BREVILOQUII PARS III. C. III.`, naming the page's **last** capitulum per the standing rule.

**Gutter.** p. 231 was measured at **x≈1194** (53 px low-ink run) by `bon-brev-p3-c1`; its bands were reused unchanged. **p. 232 measured x≈1337 (60 px run, page 2571×3823)** — `colcrop.py vol5 232` auto-measured it, both columns cropped clean with no bleed either way, confirmed visually before use. No parity reasoning was used; the parity model is spent, and 1337 sits squarely inside the ~1230–1370 overlap zone where parity would have been useless anyway.

**Raw-quality verdict, split by region** (the p. 231 lesson, applied):
- **p. 231 — body CLEAN, footer WRONG in places.** Already established by `p3-c1`; this chunk's share of that page (Cap. II's opening paragraph and note 7) needed no correction beyond ordinary serif garbles.
- **p. 232 — body CLEAN, footer USABLE BUT FLATTENED.** The djvu raw for p. 232's body (L43620–43684) carries only ordinary garbles (`liaec`, `qai`, `foctus`, `iwr`, `assumsit`→`assumsit` ok, `.\dae`, `disciplina^`, `\ll sic`, `raagnae`) with no cascade fragmentation, so it served as the transcription base with the bands as the check. Its **footer** block, by contrast, flattens sigla and reverses a citation (see below) and is a hint only.

**Apparatus (8 entries), ownership from anchors on the bands.** p. 231 carries 7 footer notes, of which only **n. 7** (`poena inflicta`⁷) anchors in this capitulum. p. 232 carries **9** footer notes; anchors are `comederetis`¹, `sinat`², `vellet`³, `disciplinae`⁴, `moriamur`⁵ (all five in the left column), `concupiscibilem`⁶ and `superbia vitae`⁷ (both in the right column, still inside Cap. II), then `divini mandati`⁸ and `ut supra`⁹, both of which fall **after** the `Cap. III.` heading and so belong to c3. p. 232's split is therefore 7 mine / 2 forwarded, and on this page the left footer block held exactly the left column's notes (1–5) and the right block 6–9 — the same coincidence p. 231 showed, and again **not** a rule: the standing finding (pp. 220, 221, 226) is that the left block fills first and can overrun the column division.

**Runover findings — both tests NEGATIVE, each closed from both sides.**
- *Page-crossing, p. 231 → p. 232 (the test `p3-c1` left open).* p. 231's last entry, n. 7, closes on a complete clause (`…de actuali c. 8-11.`), **and p. 232's left footer opens with a numbered entry `¹`** — no unnumbered fragment stands at its head. **Negative; the test is closed.**
- *Gutter-crossing within p. 232.* The left footer's last entry, n. 5, closes complete (`…edd. cum pluribus codd. maximae.`) and the right footer opens with a numbered `⁶`. **Negative.**
- p. 232's own last entry, n. 9, closes complete (`…(H vagari pro negotiari).`) but belongs to c3, which owns its re-test against p. 233's footer.
- Only one footnote series runs on each page: ordinals ascend in reading order across the page with no restart and no out-of-order entry, and every entry's content is reachable by an anchor in the body above it.

**Digits and sigla settled off the bands.**
- **p. 232 n. 4 — the raw reverses the citation.** The raw prints `De quo supra p. 11. c. II.`; the band reads **`p. II. c. 11.`** (Breviloquium Pars II, cap. 11). Independently confirmed by n. 9 on the same page, which makes the identical back-reference in expanded form as `Partis II. c. 11.` This is the serif `1`/`I` flattening working in both directions inside a single citation.
- **p. 232 n. 7 — `(A H et 2 …)`.** The raw prints `ATIet 2`. Read as **A H** per the settled `II`→`H` correspondence (p. 226 n. 5, p. 227 n. 5, p. 228 n. 9): the Breviloquium's sigla are letters, no codex is designated by a Roman numeral, and `A H et 2` — codices A and H plus edition 2 — is the coherent reading. n. 9 on the same page carries the same form (`H vagari pro negotiari`), which is c3's to record. Not flagged, but recorded here because the glyph itself is genuinely crossbar-less at 450 dpi and the reading rests on the correspondence, not on the ink.
- **p. 232 n. 7 — `E addit vetiti`, not `veliti`.** The serif `t`/`l`; settled by Cap. III's own body three paragraphs later, which prints `suavitatem ligni vetiti`.
- **p. 232 n. 7 — `cfr. Gen. 3, 5. seq.`** The band's `3` reads as `5` in this serif; Gen. 3:5 is *Eritis sicut dii*, which is exactly the passage the note is glossing, and the raw agrees.
- **p. 232 n. 1 — `Gen. 3, 1`, `ibid. v. 4`, `d. XXI. c. 1. seqq.`, `q. 1-3`.** Every `1` on this line prints like a `4` in the serif. Gen. 3:1 is *Cur praecepit vobis Deus…*, 3:4 is *Nequaquam moriemini*, 3:5 is *Eritis sicut dii* — the three verses the note lists in order, so the numbers test right against their own sense.
- **p. 232 n. 6 — `d. 25. p. I. q. 6.`** The raw's `d. 2;;.` is unreadable; the band gives 25.
- **p. 232 n. 2 — `pag. 218, nota 5`.** Confirmed on the band; 218 is inside Pars I, where the *proprios motus* citation was first made.
- **No `[?]` flags.**

**Body readings settled off the bands.** `qui prius erat sciens et rectus` (raw `qai prius orat`); `per superbiam cadendo factus est` (raw `pcr supcrliiam … foctus`); `per invidiam tentare volebat` (raw `iwr invidiam`); `cunctis filiis Adae` (raw `.\dae`); `de praecepto disciplinae` (raw `disciplina^`); `Et sic tentavit omne` (raw `\ll sic`); `magnae fuit versutiae` (raw `raagnae`) — and note that n. 5 records `magnae` as the printed reading against the editions' `maximae`, so the body stands as printed. Nothing was harmonised between body and apparatus.

**Marginalia** (Quaracchi editorial side-glosses, trimmed from the body per corpus convention; logged here in body order). p. 231 R — "Tria consideranda." · "Circa primum iterum tria." p. 232 L — "Diabolus fecit tria." · "Ratio." · "Tentationem permittere congruit." · "Diabolus tentare scivit, voluit et potuit." · "Contra praeceptum disciplinae." · "Primo mulierem." · "Tres gradus in tentando." p. 232 R — "Tres modi."

**Hand-offs.**
- *Picked up from `bon-brev-p3-c1`:* p. 231 footer note **7**, anchored on `poena inflicta`⁷ — verified on the p. 231 right footer band rather than taken on trust, and carried here as this chunk's first entry.
- *Forwarded to `bon-brev-p3-c3`:* p. 232 footer notes **8** and **9**, anchored on `divini mandati`⁸ and `ut supra`⁹ in Cap. III (*De primorum parentum transgressione*), which opens in p. 232's **right** column and is **not** complete on p. 232 — it breaks mid-word at `…excellentem scien-` and continues on p. 233. c3 must derive its span from p. 232 and p. 233, and must re-test p. 232 n. 9 against p. 233's footer for a page-crossing runover.