title: Proemium, Q. 4

source_text:
<!-- page 14 -->

> The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation; Quaracchi restart their numbering on every printed page, so the labels are qualified by page.

### QUAESTIO IV.
#### *Quae sit causa efficiens sive auctor huius libri.*

Postremo ad maiorem evidentiam potest quaeri[^p14-1] de causa *efficiente.* Et dicitur fuisse Magister Petrus Lombardus, Parisiensis Episcopus. Sed quod non debeat dici *auctor* huius libri, videtur[^p14-2].

1. Ille solus dicendus est auctor libri, qui est doctor sive auctor doctrinae; sed, sicut dicit Augustinus in libro de Magistro[^p14-3]: «Solus Christus est doctor»: ergo solus debet dici huius libri auctor.

2. Item, sicut dicit Philosophus in Ethica veteri[^p14-4]: «Non quicumque facit grammaticalia vel musicalia, debet dici grammaticus vel musicus, utpote si faciat casu, vel fortuna, vel alio supponente sive dicente»; sed Magister hoc opus composuit ex aliena doctrina, sicut ipse dicit in littera[^p14-5], quod «in hoc opere maiorum exempla doctrinamque reperies»: ergo non debet dici auctor.

*Si tu dicis*[^p14-6], quod non tantum hic est doctrina Sanctorum, sed etiam sua, ratione cuius debet dici auctor; *contra:* «A maiori et digniori debet fieri denominatio[^p14-7]»; sed Magister dicit, quod «pauisper vox sua insonuit, et tunc a paternis limitibus non discessit»: ergo non deberet iste liber dici esse Magistri.

**Contra:** Constat quod Deus hoc opus non scripsit digito suo, ergo habuit alium, creatum auctorem[^p14-8]; sed non est dare alium nisi Magistrum.

Item, si auctoritas Magistri in hac causa recipitur, ipse dicit in littera[^p14-9]: «In multo labore et sudore hoc volumen, Deo praestante, compegimus»: ergo videtur, quod ipse fuit auctor praesentis libri.

### Conclusio

> *Petrus Lombardus, Episcopus Parisiensis, est auctor huius libri.*

**Respondeo:** Ad intelligentiam dictorum notandum, quod quadruplex est modus faciendi librum. Aliquis enim scribit aliena[^p14-10], nihil addendo vel mutando; et iste mere dicitur *scriptor.* Aliquis scribit aliena, addendo, sed non de suo; et iste *compilator* dicitur. Aliquis scribit et aliena et sua, sed aliena tamquam principalia, et sua tamquam annexa ad evidentiam; et iste dicitur *commentator,* non auctor[^p15-1]. Aliquis scribit et sua et aliena, sed sua tamquam principalia, aliena tamquam annexa ad confirmationem; et talis debet dici *auctor.* Talis fuit Magister, qui[^p15-2] sententias suas ponit et Patrum sententiis confirmat. Unde vere debet dici auctor huius libri.

<!-- page 15 -->

1. Quod ergo obiicitur, quod solus Christus est doctor et auctor; dicendum, quod sicut dicit Augustinus in libro de Doctrina christiana[^p15-3], docere est dupliciter, sicut dicitur dupliciter aliquis facere videre. Aliter enim facit videre qui visum restituit, aliter, qui visibile digito ostendit; et[^p15-4] primum facit Deus, secundum homo. Similiter aliter docet qui scientiam, quam habet in anima[^p15-5], verbo vel scripto offert vel ostendit, aliter, qui habitum scientiae imprimit; uterque tamen dicitur doctor et auctor, sed Deus principalius; sic[^p15-6] in proposito.

2. Quod obiicitur, quod fecit[^p15-7] librum, alio supponente; dicendum, quod non ideo dicitur facere aliquis, supponente alio, quia[^p15-8] ab alio didicit — tunc enim pauci essent doctores vel grammatici — sed si omnino scientia eius dependet ab alio, ita quod non habet habitum intra, sicut illi qui faciunt bonum latinum, quia alii eis[^p15-9] dixerunt, sed ipsi ignorant artem; hoc modo non fuit Magister. Nam a scientia, quam acquisierat longo tempore vel labore, hoc opus composuit et per doctrinas Patrum suas sententias[^p15-10] confirmavit. Et quod sunt ibi multa dicta aliorum, hoc non tollit Magistro auctoritatem, sed potius eius auctoritatem confirmat[^p15-11] et humilitatem commendat.

---

english:
<!-- page 14 -->

### QUESTION IV.
#### *What the efficient cause, or the author, of this book is.*

Lastly, for greater clarity, it can be asked[^p14-1] about the *efficient* cause. And it is said to have been Master Peter Lombard, Bishop of Paris. But that he ought not to be called the *author* of this book, is shown thus[^p14-2].

1. He alone is to be called the author of a book who is the teacher or the author of the teaching; but, as Augustine says in the book *On the Teacher*[^p14-3]: «Christ alone is teacher»: therefore he alone ought to be called the author of this book.

2. Likewise, as the Philosopher says in the old *Ethics*[^p14-4]: «Not everyone who makes grammatical or musical things ought to be called a grammarian or a musician — as, for instance, if he should do it by chance, or by luck, or with another prompting or dictating»; but the Master composed this work out of another's teaching, as he himself says in the text[^p14-5], that «in this work you will find the examples and the teaching of our forebears»: therefore he ought not to be called the author.

*If you say*[^p14-6], that here there is not only the teaching of the Saints but also his own, by reason of which he ought to be called the author; *on the contrary:* «Denomination ought to be made from the greater and the worthier[^p14-7]»; but the Master says that «for a little while his own voice sounded, and even then it did not depart from the bounds set by the fathers»: therefore this book ought not to be said to be the Master's.

**On the contrary:** It is certain that God did not write this work with his own finger, therefore it had another, created author[^p14-8]; but there is no other to assign except the Master.

Likewise, if the Master's authority is received in this cause, he himself says in the text[^p14-9]: «With much labour and sweat, God granting it, we have put this volume together»: therefore it seems that he was the author of the present book.

### Conclusion

> *Peter Lombard, Bishop of Paris, is the author of this book.*

**I respond:** For the understanding of what has been said it must be noted that there is a fourfold manner of making a book. For someone writes another's matter[^p14-10], adding or changing nothing; and he is called merely a *scribe.* Someone writes another's matter, adding, but nothing of his own; and he is called a *compiler.* Someone writes both another's and his own, but another's as the principal matter and his own as annexed for clarification; and he is called a *commentator,* not an author[^p15-1]. Someone writes both his own and another's, but his own as the principal matter and another's as annexed for confirmation; and such a one ought to be called an *author.* Such was the Master, who[^p15-2] sets down his own sentences and confirms them by the sentences of the Fathers. Hence he ought truly to be called the author of this book.

<!-- page 15 -->

1. As to what is objected, then, that Christ alone is teacher and author; it must be said that, as Augustine says in the book *On Christian Doctrine*[^p15-3], to teach is twofold, just as someone is said in two ways to make another see. For one makes another see in one way who restores his sight, in another way who points out the visible thing with his finger; and[^p15-4] the first God does, the second man. Similarly, one teaches in one way who offers or shows, by word or by writing, the knowledge which he has in his soul[^p15-5], in another way he who imprints the habit of knowledge; yet each is called teacher and author, but God more principally; so[^p15-6] in the case before us.

2. As to what is objected, that he made[^p15-7] the book with another prompting him; it must be said that someone is not said to make something with another prompting merely because[^p15-8] he learned it from another — for then there would be few teachers or grammarians — but if his knowledge depends altogether on another, so that he does not have the habit within, like those who make good Latin because others have told it to them[^p15-9], while they themselves do not know the art; in this way the Master was not. For out of the knowledge which he had acquired over long time and labour he composed this work, and by the teachings of the Fathers he confirmed his own sentences[^p15-10]. And that there are in it many sayings of others, this does not take away the Master's authority, but rather confirms[^p15-11] his authority and commends his humility.

---

la: Suffragante nullo codice, Vat., omissis praecedentibus verbis, incipit ab istis: *De causa.*

en: With no codex supporting it, the Vatican edition, the preceding words having been omitted, begins from these: *De causa.*

la: Vat. adiungit *sic,* quod tamen deest in mss. et sex primis edd.

en: The Vatican edition adds *sic,* which however is wanting in the manuscripts and the first six editions.

la: Colligitur ex c. 14. Cfr. etiam Expos. in Epist. I. S. Ioan. Tract. 4.

en: It is gathered from c. 14. See also the *Exposition on the First Epistle of St. John,* Tract 4.

la: Verba Aristotelis (II. Ethic. c. 4.) iuxta antiquam translationem in operibus S. Thomae (Parmae 1867) sunt: Vel neque in artibus ita (res) se habet? Contingit enim grammaticum quid facere a casu et alio supposito; tunc igitur grammaticus, si grammaticum quid faciat et grammatice. — Vide supra q. 2. arg. 5. ad opp. — Vat. sola post *Ethica* omittit *veteri.* — Codd. I L N O V X *vel docente* pro *sive dicente.*

en: Aristotle's words (*Ethics* II, c. 4) according to the ancient translation in the works of St. Thomas (Parma 1867) are: Or is it not so in the arts either? For it can happen that a man makes something grammatical by chance and with another prompting him; then, therefore, he is a grammarian, if he makes something grammatical and grammatically. — See above, q. 2, arg. 5 *ad opp.* — The Vatican edition alone omits *veteri* after *Ethica.* — Codices I L N O V X *vel docente* for *sive dicente.*

la: In Prologo. — Ex mss. et sex primis edd. substituimus *sicut* loco *nam* et mox supplevimus omissum *quod.*

en: In the Prologue. — From the manuscripts and the first six editions we have substituted *sicut* in place of *nam,* and presently we have supplied the omitted *quod.*

la: Plures codd. A H I K T etc. *dicas.*

en: Several codices, A H I K T etc., *dicas.*

la: Aristot., II. de Anima text. 49. (c. 4.): *A fine appellari omnia justum est.* Finem autem Aristot. diversis in locis (II. Phys. text. 23. et V. Metaph. text. 3.) dicit esse *optimum rei.* — Verba Magistri mox citata vide infra in Prologo. Vat. praeter fidem mss. et ed. 1 in prima parte verborum Magistri post *quod* addit *si* et ultimam eorum partem ita exhibet: *non tamen a paternis limitibus discessit.* Sed notandum, quod S. Doctor saepe saepius verba sive Magistri sive S. Patrum non verbotenus, sed tantum ad sensum recitet. — Mox ex pluribus codd. C F G I K L R S T etc. *deberet* posuimus pro *debet.*

en: Aristotle, *On the Soul* II, text 49 (c. 4): *It is right that all things be named from their end.* And the end Aristotle in various places (*Physics* II, text 23, and *Metaphysics* V, text 3) says is *the best of a thing.* — For the Master's words cited presently, see below in the Prologue. The Vatican edition, against the witness of the manuscripts and of edition 1, in the first part of the Master's words adds *si* after *quod,* and presents the last part of them thus: *non tamen a paternis limitibus discessit.* But it must be noted that the holy Doctor very often recites the words either of the Master or of the holy Fathers not word for word, but only according to the sense. — Presently, from several codices, C F G I K L R S T etc., we have put *deberet* for *debet.*

la: Vat. cum recentiori cod. cc, omisso *creatum,* non bene habet *doctorem* pro *auctorem,* antiquioribus mss. et ed. 1 reluctantibus.

en: The Vatican edition, with the more recent codex cc, having omitted *creatum,* has, not well, *doctorem* for *auctorem,* the older manuscripts and edition 1 resisting.

la: In Prologo; vide infra. — In prima propositione huius argumenti post *Item* ex antiquioribus mss. et ed. 1 adiecimus *si* et dein substituimus *causa* pro *parte,* quae lectio iam ex isto adagio: Nemo in propria causa est iudex, praeferenda videtur. — Mox post *recipitur* in Vat. additur *ideo cum,* quod abest a mss. et ed. 1.

en: In the Prologue; see below. — In the first proposition of this argument, after *Item,* from the older manuscripts and edition 1 we have added *si,* and then we have substituted *causa* for *parte,* which reading already seems preferable from that adage: No one is a judge in his own cause. — Presently, after *recipitur,* there is added in the Vatican edition *ideo cum,* which is absent from the manuscripts and edition 1.

la: Vat. et recentior cod. cc non cohaerenter cum consequentibus habent *alienam materiam,* obnitentibus antiquioribus mss. et ed. 1.

en: The Vatican edition and the more recent codex cc have, incoherently with what follows, *alienam materiam,* the older manuscripts and edition 1 striving against it.

la: Sequimur codd. R T X ee addendo *non auctor,* quae lectio et ex se et ex subnexis probatur, insuper ex falsa lectione multorum codd. ut A B F H I M V W Y Z aa bb cc ff cum ed. 1 *et auctor* confirmatur.

en: We follow codices R T X ee in adding *non auctor,* which reading is proved both from itself and from what is subjoined, and is moreover confirmed by the false reading *et auctor* of many codices, as A B F H I M V W Y Z aa bb cc ff, with edition 1.

la: Fide mss. et ed. 1 mutavimus *quoniam* in *qui.* Mox plures codd. ut F H I O T U aa et ed. 1 *per Patrum sententias.*

en: On the faith of the manuscripts and of edition 1 we have changed *quoniam* into *qui.* Presently several codices, as F H I O T U aa, and edition 1, *per Patrum sententias.*

la: In Prooemio, ubi haec Augustini sententia quoad sensum verborum invenitur.

en: In the Proemium, where this saying of Augustine is found as to the sense of the words.

la: In Vat. deest particula *et* a mss. et ed. 1 exhibita.

en: In the Vatican edition the particle *et* is wanting, which the manuscripts and edition 1 present.

la: Falsam lectionem Vat. et cod. cc *alium* pro *anima* emendamus ope aliorum mss. et ed. 1.

en: The false reading of the Vatican edition and of codex cc, *alium* for *anima,* we correct with the help of the other manuscripts and of edition 1.

la: Substituimus ex codd. D F H R aa ee et ed. 1 *sic* loco *sicut;* quae lectio sincerior nobis videtur eo, quod per particulam *sic* applicatio generalium principiorum in praecedentibus nondum facta, sed iam facienda melius indicatur. Codd. D ee et ed. 1 addunt *est.*

en: We have substituted, from codices D F H R aa ee and edition 1, *sic* in place of *sicut;* which reading seems to us the sounder in that, by the particle *sic,* the application of the general principles laid down in what precedes — an application not yet made, but now to be made — is better indicated. Codices D ee and edition 1 add *est.*

la: Subaudi: Magister.

en: Understand: the Master.

la: Codd. B C D G H K O S U V ee ff cum ed. 1 *qui* pro *quia,* Cod. A *quae,* sed non bene propter superius positum *non ideo.* Paulo post Vat. contra mss. et ed. 1 *dependeat* pro *dependet* et *habeat* loco *habet.*

en: Codices B C D G H K O S U V ee ff, with edition 1, *qui* for *quia;* codex A *quae,* but not well, on account of the *non ideo* set down above. A little after, the Vatican edition, against the manuscripts and edition 1, *dependeat* for *dependet* and *habeat* in place of *habet.*

la: Lapsum librariorum in Vat. *ei* pro *eis* emendavimus; paulo post reposuimus *fuit* loco *fecit librum istum* auctoritate mss. et ed. 1.

en: We have corrected the copyists' slip in the Vatican edition, *ei* for *eis;* a little after we have restored *fuit* in place of *fecit librum istum,* on the authority of the manuscripts and of edition 1.

la: Codd. F O X *per doctrinas et Patrum sententias;* lectio non spernenda, a qua codd. H S V et ed. 1 in eo tantum discedunt, quod omittant particulam *et.* Cod. R *per catholicas Patrum sententias.*

en: Codices F O X *per doctrinas et Patrum sententias;* a reading not to be despised, from which codices H S V and edition 1 depart only in this, that they omit the particle *et.* Codex R *per catholicas Patrum sententias.*

la: Non ita bene Vat. cum recentiori cod. cc omittit *confirmat,* quod tamen in antiquioribus mss. et ed. 1 habetur.

en: Not so well, the Vatican edition with the more recent codex cc omits *confirmat,* which however is had in the older manuscripts and in edition 1. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from the IA djvu OCR (`raw/bonaventure_vol1_raw.txt`, raw L10907–11101)
with **both printed pages read at the plate** (`raw/vision/vol1/p-014.png`, `p-015.png`, 450 dpi,
2028 × 2986 px; offset `pdf = printed + 102`) as the arbiter of the page span, of every footnote
marker position, of the marginalia and of every apparatus digit. p. 15 was extracted for this chunk;
p. 14 was already on disk from `bon-sent-I-proem-q3`. **The raw is sound throughout this chunk** —
unlike q3's p. 14 Scholion continuation, no region here needed re-setting from the plate. English is
a fresh literal translation. Every apparatus entry was read off a 2.2× footer band, never off a
whole-page view.

**Page span, fixed positively.** Opens at the bare `QUAESTIO IV.` display heading (raw L10907), set
full measure just below the middle of **p. 14** under q3's Scholion, and closes at *humilitatem
commendat* on **p. 15**, against the `PROLOGUS MAGISTRI` display heading that opens p. 16 (raw
L11102). **The map in `next-session-resume.md` was corrected at q3 and is confirmed here: this
quaestio runs pp. 14–15, not p. 15 alone.**

**⛔ THIS QUAESTIO PRINTS NO SCHOLION — the first unit of Book I's front matter without one, and it
is a positive finding, not a failed read.** q1, q2 and q3 each carry a Scholion; q4 does not.
Verified on the plate: p. 15's body ends **two-fifths down the leaf**, the lower half of both columns
is blank but for Quaracchi's ornamental rule and the footer register, and the next display matter in
the volume is `PROLOGUS MAGISTRI` on p. 16. `has_scholion: false`. ⚠ The standing rule that blank
space at a column foot is never a boundary is satisfied here not by reading the white space but by
fixing the end positively from the next display heading.

**★★ THE RUNNING HEAD'S FOUR-LEAF LYING RUN ENDS HERE — WHICH IS NOT A REASON TO START TRUSTING IT.**
pp. 9, 12 and 14 each carried a head naming a quaestio that owned only part of the leaf. p. 14's
`PROOEMII QUAEST. IV.` is *right about this chunk* (q4 owns its lower two-thirds) and was *wrong
about q3* on the same leaf, and p. 15's head is simply right. Nothing was set or corroborated from
either. The boundaries here are the `QUAESTIO IV.` display heading at one end and the `PROLOGUS
MAGISTRI` display heading at the other.

**Apparatus: 21 entries.** p. 14 nn. 1–10 (inherited — see the hand-off below) · p. 15 nn. 1–11.
**Nothing is forwarded**: p. 15's whole register answers to anchors in this chunk's body, and
`bon-sent-I-littera` (pp. 16–17) starts on a fresh leaf.

**Hand-off PICKED UP from `bon-sent-I-proem-q3`: ownership was verified there, positions were
re-derived here.** q3 forwarded **all ten** of p. 14's notes as q4's, and that is correct: n. 1
glosses this chunk's opening *potest quaeri,* and nn. 2–10 answer to anchors in its fundamenta, its
*Contra* and the opening of its *Respondeo* (videtur ² · de Magistro ³ · veteri ⁴ · in littera ⁵ ·
*Si tu dicis* ⁶ · denominatio ⁷ · auctorem ⁸ · in littera ⁹ · aliena ¹⁰). q3 asserted nothing about
where they land, and was right not to; the positions below are this chunk's own reading.

**★ BLOCK STRUCTURE AND ANCHOR STRUCTURE COINCIDED ON ONE LEAF AND CAME APART ON THE OTHER — state
the two splits separately, as always.** p. 14: block **7/3** (nn. 1–7 open in the left block, n. 7
overrunning the column division and continuing at the head of the right block at `Magistri mox citata
vide infra in Prologo`; nn. 8–10 in the right block) against anchors **7/3** — *the first leaf in
this family where the two agree.* p. 15: block **6/5** (nn. 1–6 left, nn. 7–11 right) against anchors
**5/6** — n. 6 anchors at *sed Deus principalius; sic ⁶ in proposito,* which stands in the **right**
column, two lines below the page's head. **The agreement on p. 14 is a coincidence on one leaf and
carries no licence for the next one; p. 15 proves it in the same chunk.**

**Digits and sigla settled at the plate against the raw.** The `1`/`4` class is live in both
directions and twice on one line: p. 14 n. 3 prints `Colligitur ex c. 14.` (serif 1) and `Tract. 4.`
(true 4) fourteen words apart, and p. 14 n. 7's `text. 49. (c. 4.)`, `II. Phys. text. 23.` and
`V. Metaph. text. 3.` were each read at 2.2× before transcription. **The edition siglum is the
chronic case:** `ed. 1` prints a serif `1` that the raw renders now `I`, now `4` — p. 15 n. 6's raw
`ed. 4 addunt est` and n. 9's raw `ed. 4` are both `ed. 1` on the plate, and the note's own sense
(`antiquioribus mss. et ed. 1`) agrees. **Sigla corrected against the raw:** p. 15 n. 2 raw `FHIOTH
aa` → plate **`F H I O T U aa`** (the last upright is a `U`; the run is alphabetical) · p. 15 n. 8 raw
`BCDGHIvOSUV` → plate **`B C D G H K O S U V`** (raw's `Iv` is the chronic K-garble, and alphabetical
order fixes it) · p. 14 n. 4's `I L N O V X` and n. 6's `A H I K T` were checked and the raw is right
in both.

**⛔ A DEFECTIVE SORT STANDS AS PRINTED — TWO OF THEM, AND THEY ARE DIFFERENT CASES.**
1. **p. 14, in the *Si tu dicis* paragraph, the Master's word prints `«pau` at the end of one line and
   `isper` at the head of the next — with neither an `l` nor a hyphen**, confirmed at 8× (the line
   does not run flush to the column rule, so there was room for both). The word is *paulisper.*
   Transcribed as printed — reflowed, `pauisper` — on the same discipline as q2's `thelogorum` and
   q3's `Scholaticorum`. **Not flagged: the ink is not in doubt and neither is the word meant.** The
   English renders the sense (*for a little while*), as it must.
2. **p. 15 n. 10 prints `Patrum sent·ntias` for *sententias*** — the `e` inked only at its top, a
   broken sort rather than a wrong one. Here the English and the Latin both give *sententias*,
   because the note is reporting codex R's substantive variant (*catholicas*) and a half-inked letter
   is a defect of this copy, not a reading. **The two cases are recorded together precisely because
   they were handled differently.**

**Marginalia, trimmed from the body and transcribed here in body order** (standing Vol I convention).
— p. 14: *Ad oppositum.* (beside the first argument) · *Fundamenta.* (beside the `Contra:`) ·
*Quadruplex modus faciendi libros.* (right margin, beside the *Respondeo*). — p. 15: *Conclusio.*
(beside *Talis fuit Magister*) · *Solutio oppositorum.* (beside the reply to the first argument).
**★ The first two are in the reverse order from q3's, and the reason is structural, not editorial
carelessness:** this quaestio prints the *negative* arguments first, so *Ad oppositum.* stands beside
argument 1 and *Fundamenta.* beside the `Contra:`. ⚠ And the same doubling as q3 recurs across the
opening: a display `CONCLUSIO.` heading on **p. 14** with the italic conclusion under it, and a
marginal *Conclusio.* gloss on **p. 15** beside *Talis fuit Magister.* They are different things;
only the display heading is rendered.

**Register (continues the one frozen at `bon-sent-I-proem-q1` and extended at q2 and q3; these are
its additions).** The four-fold division of book-making is the whole point of the *Respondeo* and its
four names are kept one-to-one and italic in both languages: *scriptor* → "scribe" · *compilator* →
"compiler" · *commentator* → "commentator" · *auctor* → **"author"** throughout, never "authority"
(*auctoritas,* which stands three times in this chunk, takes "authority" and must stay separately
available) · *aliena* → **"another's matter"** (the substantive plural is what the fourfold division
turns on; "other things" loses it) · *supponente alio* / *alio supponente sive dicente* → "with
another prompting" / "with another prompting or dictating" (never "supposing") · *denominatio* →
"denomination" (the technical *a maiori fieri denominatio*) · *in littera* → "in the text" (the
Master's own text, as at q3) · *maiorum exempla* → "the examples of our forebears" · *habitum
scientiae imprimit* → "imprints the habit of knowledge" · *bonum latinum* → "good Latin".

**⛔ THE THREE GUARD-RAIL AUDITS CANNOT SEE THIS CHUNK — AND ONE OF THEM DESTROYS A REAL LOG WHEN YOU
TRY.** `audit-paraphrase.py`, `audit-headers.py` and `audit-apparatus-count.py` all select on the
filename regex `bon-sent-{I,II,III,IV}-d(\d+)-`; a `distinctio: 0` front-matter chunk never matches,
and all three printed a clean verdict on **0 chunks audited**. **New here:** `audit-paraphrase.py
--min-d 0 --max-d 0` also **overwrote `manual-review/d1-d40-paraphrase-audit.md` with an empty
0-chunk report**, silently discarding the last real Vol I paraphrase audit; it was restored with
`git checkout --`. **Do not run the paraphrase audit on a front-matter range**, and never record such
a run as audits-clean. This chunk was verified instead by marker pairing and structural parity in
`build-content.mjs`, by `polish-style-scan.py` and `build-citations.py` on the full corpus, and by
plate discipline on both leaves.

**Corpus checks at this commit.** `build-content.mjs` **2057 → 2058**, 8 books, all translated ·
marker pairing **21 defs, 21 anchors in each language, no orphans** · `polish-style-scan` full
corpus: the same **10 PAIR issues across 5 chunks, all pre-existing** · `build-citations.py`
**2059 chunks scanned, QA flags 202 → 202 — none attributable to this chunk.** ★ This chunk appears
in the report's *"Chunks contributing no citation record"* list, and that is correct rather than a
miss: its apparatus cites only Aristotle (an excluded authority) and Quaracchi's own *In Prologo* /
*In Prooemio*, and its body carries no scripture and no `N. Sent.` locus at all.

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


site: bonaventure

collection: Book I: On the Mystery of the Trinity

title: Textus Magistri

title_alt: PROLOGUS MAGISTRI in libros Sententiarum

title_alt: The Master's Prologue to the Books of Sentences

author: St. Bonaventure

languages: en la

title: Opera Omnia (Quaracchi critical edition)

publisher: Collegii S. Bonaventurae

source_text:
<!-- page 16 -->

> The numbered footnotes below correspond to markers in both the Latin body above and the English translation; Quaracchi restart their numbering on every printed page, so the labels are qualified by page.

### PROLOGUS MAGISTRI
#### *IN LIBROS SENTENTIARUM*[^p16-1]

Cupientes aliquid de penuria ac tenuitate nostra cum paupercula in gazophylacium Domini mittere[^p16-2], ardua scandere, opus ultra vires nostras agere praesumsimus, consummationis fiduciam laborisque mercedem in Samaritano[^p16-3] statuentes, qui, prolatis in curationem semivivi duobus denariis, supereroganti cuncta reddere professus est. Delectat nos veritas pollicentis, sed terret immensitas laboris: desiderium hortatur proficiendi, sed dehortatur infirmitas deficiendi, quam vincit zelus domus Dei. «Quo[^p16-4] inardescentes, fidem nostram adversus errores carnalium atque animalium hominum» Davidicae turris clypeis munire vel potius munitam ostendere ac theologicarum inquisitionum abdita aperire nec non et sacramentorum ecclesiasticorum pro modico[^p16-5] intelligentiae nostrae notitiam tradere studuimus, «non valentes studiosorum fratrum votis iure resistere, eorum in Christo laudabilibus studiis lingua ac stilo nos servire flagitantium, quas bigas in nobis agitat Christi caritas[^p16-6]».

«Qnamvis[^p16-7] non ambigamus, omnem humani eloquii sermonem calumniae atque contradictioni aemulorum semper fuisse obnoxium, quia, dissentientibus voluntatum motibus, dissentiens quoque fit animorum sensus», «ut, cum omne dictum veri ratione perfectum sit, tamen, dum aliud aliis aut videtur aut complacet, veritati vel non intellectae vel offendenti[^p16-8] impietatis error obnitatur, ac voluntatis invidia resultet», «quam *Deus huius saeculi operatur* in illis *diffidentiae filiis*[^p16-9], qui non rationi voluntatem subiiciunt nec doctrinae studium impendunt, sed his quae somniarunt sapientiae verba coaptare nituntur, non veri, sed placiti rationem sectantes, quos iniqua voluntas non ad intelligentiam

<!-- page 17 -->

veritatis, sed ad defensionem[^p17-1] placentium incitat, non desiderantes doceri veritatem, sed *ab ea ad fabulas convertentes auditum*[^p17-2]. Quorum professio est magis placita quam docenda conquirere nec docenda desiderare, sed desideratis doctrinam coaptare. *Habent rationem sapientiae in superstitione*[^p17-3]: quia fidei defectionem sequitur hypocrisis mendax, ut sit vel[^p17-4] in verbis pietas, quam amiserit conscientia, ipsamque simulatam pietatem omni[^p17-5] verborum mendacio impiam reddunt, falsae doctrinae institutis fidei sanctitatem corrumpere molientes auriumque pruriginem sub novello sui desiderii dogmate aliis ingerentes, qui contentioni studentes contra veritatem sine foedere bellant». «Inter veri namque assertionem et placiti defensionem pertinax pugna est, dum se et[^p17-6] veritas tenet, et se voluntas erroris tuetur». Horum igitur et[^p17-7] Deo odibilem ecclesiam evertere atque ora oppilare, ne virus nequitiae in alios effundere queant, et lucernam veritatis in candelabro exaltare volentes[^p17-8], in labore multo ac sudore hoc volumen, Deo praestante, compegimus ex testimoniis veritatis in aeternum fundatis, in quatuor libros distinctum.

In quo maiorum exempla doctrinamque reperies[^p17-9], in quo per dominicae fidei sinceram professionem vipereae doctrinae fraudulentiam prodidimus, aditum demonstrandae veritatis complexi nec periculo impiae professionis inserti[^p17-10], temperato inter utrumque moderamine utentes. Sicubi vero parum vox nostra insonuit[^p17-11], non a paternis discessit limitibus. «Non igitur debet hic labor cuiquam pigro vel multum docto videri superfluus, cum multis impigris multisque indoctis, inter quos etiam mihi, sit necessarius[^p17-12]», brevi volumine complicans Patrum sententias, appositis eorum testimoniis, ut non sit necesse quaerenti librorum numerositatem evolvere, cui brevitas collecta[^p17-13] quod quaeritur offert sine labore. «In hoc autem tractatu non solum pium lectorem, sed etiam liberum correctorem desidero, maxime ubi profunda versatur veritatis quaestio, quae utinam tot haberet inventores, quot habet contradictores[^p17-14]». Ut autem quod quaeritur facilius occurrat, titulos, quibus singulorum librorum capitula distinguuntur, praemisimus.

Explicit prologus.

---

english:
<!-- page 16 -->

### THE MASTER'S PROLOGUE
#### *TO THE BOOKS OF SENTENCES*[^p16-1]

Desiring to cast something out of our own poverty and slenderness, together with the poor widow, into the Lord's treasury[^p16-2], to climb steep places, we have presumed to undertake a work beyond our strength, placing the confidence of its completion and the wage of our labour in the Samaritan[^p16-3], who, when two denarii had been brought out for the healing of the half-dead man, promised to repay in full whatever should be spent beyond them. The truth of him who promises delights us, but the immensity of the labour affrights us: the desire of making progress exhorts us, but the weakness of falling short dissuades us — a weakness which zeal for the house of God overcomes. «Burning with which[^p16-4], we have striven to fortify our faith against the errors of carnal and animal men» with the shields of the tower of David, or rather to show it already fortified, and to open the hidden things of theological inquiries, and likewise to hand on a knowledge of the sacraments of the Church according to the little measure[^p16-5] of our understanding, «not being able rightly to resist the desires of studious brethren, who demand that we serve their praiseworthy studies in Christ with tongue and pen, which two horses the charity of Christ drives in us[^p16-6]».

«Although[^p16-7] we do not doubt that every discourse of human speech has always been liable to the calumny and contradiction of rivals, since, when the motions of wills disagree, the sense of minds also comes to disagree», «so that, although every saying is perfect by the account of truth, yet, while one thing seems or pleases to some and another to others, the error of impiety strives against a truth either not understood or giving offence[^p16-8], and the envy of the will rebounds», «which *the god of this world works* in those *sons of diffidence*[^p16-9], who do not subject their will to reason nor spend study upon doctrine, but strive to fit the words of wisdom to the things they have dreamed, following the account not of the true but of the pleasing, whom an iniquitous will incites not to the understanding

<!-- page 17 -->

of truth, but to the defence[^p17-1] of the things that please them, not desiring to be taught the truth, but *turning their hearing away from it to fables*[^p17-2]. Their profession is to seek out what pleases rather than what is to be taught, and not to desire the things to be taught, but to fit doctrine to the things desired. *They have an account of wisdom in superstition*[^p17-3]: because a lying hypocrisy follows upon the failure of faith, so that there may be at least[^p17-4] in words the piety which conscience has lost; and that very simulated piety they render impious by every[^p17-5] mendacity of words, contriving to corrupt the sanctity of faith by the institutes of false doctrine, and thrusting upon others an itching of the ears under the new-fangled dogma of their own desire — men who, being zealous for contention, war against the truth without a treaty». «For between the assertion of the true and the defence of the pleasing there is a stubborn battle, so long as both[^p17-6] truth holds its own and the will guards its error». Wishing therefore both[^p17-7] to overturn the church of these men, hateful to God, and to stop their mouths, lest they be able to pour out the poison of their wickedness upon others, and to lift up the lamp of truth upon the lampstand[^p17-8], we have with much toil and sweat, God granting it, put together this volume out of the testimonies of truth founded unto eternity, divided into four books.

In it you will find[^p17-9] the examples and the teaching of our forebears; in it, through a sincere profession of the Lord's faith, we have exposed the fraudulence of viperine doctrine, having embraced the approach of demonstrating the truth, yet not entangled[^p17-10] in the peril of impious profession, using a moderation tempered between the two. But if anywhere our own voice has sounded too little[^p17-11], it has not departed from the paternal boundaries. «This labour, then, ought not to seem superfluous to anyone lazy or very learned, since it is necessary to many who are not lazy and to many unlearned, among whom I too am[^p17-12]» — gathering into a short volume the sentences of the Fathers, with their testimonies set alongside, so that it need not be necessary for one who seeks to unroll a multitude of books, since the brevity here collected[^p17-13] offers without labour what is sought. «But in this treatise I desire not only a devout reader, but also a free corrector, especially where a deep question of truth is handled, which — would that it had as many discoverers as it has contradictors[^p17-14]». And that what is sought may come to hand the more easily, we have prefixed the titles by which the chapters of the several books are distinguished.

Here ends the prologue.

---

la: Editiones et codices, quos contulimus, aut omittunt hanc epigraphem, aut varie exhibent; cumque non sibi constent, nihil est cur in ea aliquid immutemus. Editores Vaticani, editionem 2 secuti, hunc prologum in tres partes diviserunt, singulas singulis titulis distinguentes, at contra fidem omnium codicum nec non aliarum editionum, quorum auctoritate divisionem sustulimus, titulis contractis et in marginem reiectis. Ipse S. Bonaventura in Commentario hunc prologum in duas partes principales dispertit in margine notatas.

en: The editions and codices which we have collated either omit this heading or give it in varying forms; and since they are not consistent among themselves, there is no reason why we should alter anything in it. The Vatican editors, following edition 2, divided this prologue into three parts, distinguishing each by its own title, but against the witness of all the codices and of the other editions as well, on whose authority we have removed the division, the titles being contracted and thrown out into the margin. St. Bonaventure himself, in his Commentary, distributes this prologue into two principal parts, noted in the margin.

la: Respicitur illud Luc. 21, 2; et Marc. 12, 42. — Mox post verbum *scandere* in sola ed. 8 additur coniunctio *et.*

en: Reference is made to that passage of Luc. 21, 2; and Marc. 12, 42. — Presently, after the word *scandere,* the conjunction *et* is added in ed. 8 alone.

la: Alluditur ad Luc. 10, 35.

en: An allusion is made to Luc. 10, 35.

la: Haec verba, paucis mutatis vel transpositis a Magistro, ita leguntur apud August. III. de Trin. n. 1: «Pro studio, quo fidem nostram adversus errorem carnalium et animalium hominum muniri inardesco, necesse est me pati». Omnes codd. et edd. cum. Vat. legunt *atque* pro *et. Errorem* vero pro *errores* habet cum Augustino etiam ed. 2, quam tamen, contradicentibus omnibus codd. ceterisque edd., sequi non licet, cum perfamiliare fuerit Magistro verba, quae aliunde accipit, in usum suum mutare, ea per varios casus inflectendo, transponendo et minuendo, vel de suo alia interponendo et addendo. Quod non semel lectoribus observandi occasionem dabimus.

en: These words, with a few things changed or transposed by the Master, are read thus in August., *de Trin.* III, n. 1: «For the zeal with which I burn that our faith be fortified against the error of carnal and animal men, I must needs suffer». All the codices and editions, with the Vatican, read *atque* for *et.* Ed. 2 also has *errorem* for *errores,* with Augustine; which nevertheless, since all the codices and the remaining editions contradict it, may not be followed, since it was very familiar to the Master to change to his own use the words which he takes from elsewhere, inflecting them through various cases, transposing and shortening them, or interposing and adding others of his own. Of which we shall more than once give readers occasion to observe.

la: Cod B cum omnibus edd. legit *pro modulo,* refragantibus Codd. A C D E cum aliis plurimis, quos Florentiae et Pataviae consuluimus. In cod. D manus altera saeculi XV. scripsit ad marginem *pro modulo:* glossema, quod forte in aliis mss. a margine in textum irrepsit et inde in editis obtinuit.

en: Codex B, with all the editions, reads *pro modulo,* against Codices A C D E with very many others which we consulted at Florence and at Padua. In codex D a second hand of the fifteenth century wrote in the margin *pro modulo:* a gloss which perhaps in other manuscripts crept from the margin into the text, and thence prevailed in the printed editions.

la: August. loc. cit. «... fratribus autem non valeam resistere, iure, quo eis servus factus sum, flagitantibus, ut eorum in Christo laudabilibus studiis lingua ac stilo meo, quas bigas in me caritas agitat, maxime serviam».

en: Augustine, in the place cited. «... but I cannot resist the brethren, who demand, by the right whereby I have been made their servant, that I serve to the utmost their praiseworthy studies in Christ with my tongue and pen, which two horses charity drives in me».

la: Hilar. de Trin. libr. x. n. 1: «Non est ambiguum, omnem humani eloquii sermonem contradictioni obnoxium semper fuisse: quia dissentientibus voluntatum motibus, dissentiens quoque fit sensus animorum; cum adversantium affectione compugnans, assertionibus his, quibus offenditur, contradicit. Quamvis enim omne dictum veri ratione perfectum sit, tamen, dum aliud aliis aut videtur, aut complacet, patet veritatis sermo adversantium responsioni: quia contra veritatem aut non intellectam aut offendentem vel stultae vel vitiosae voluntatis error obnititur. Immoderata enim est omnis susceptarum voluntatum pertinacia; et indeflexo motu adversandi studium persistit, ubi non rationi voluntas subiicitur nec studium doctrinae impenditur, sed his quae volumus rationem conquirimus, et his quae studemus doctrinam coaptamus. Iamque nominis potius quam naturae erit doctrina, quae fingitur: et non iam veri manebit ratio, sed placiti, quam sibi voluntas magis ad defensionem placentium coaptaverit, non quae voluntatis instinctum per intelligentiam veri rationabilis incitabit». Dein post verba *placentium incitat,* totidem omissis quot attulit, sequentia usque ad *foedere bellant* ex eodem Hilario ibidem n. 2. passim excerpsit Magister. Tum ad Hilar. n. 1. rediens, ut pauca illa: *Inter veri namque* usque *tuetur,* accipiat, ubique pro more suo etiam in iis, quae accipit, aliquid demit, mutat interpolatque.

en: Hilary, *de Trin.* bk. x, n. 1: «It is not doubtful that every discourse of human speech has always been liable to contradiction: because, when the motions of wills disagree, the sense of minds also comes to disagree; and, fighting against the affection of opponents, it contradicts those assertions by which it is offended. For although every saying is perfect by the account of truth, yet, while one thing seems or pleases to some and another to others, the word of truth lies open to the answering of opponents: because against a truth either not understood or giving offence there strives the error of a will either foolish or vicious. For all obstinacy of wills once taken up is immoderate; and with an unbending motion the zeal of opposing persists, where the will is not subjected to reason nor is study spent upon doctrine, but we hunt up a reason for the things we wish, and fit doctrine to the things we pursue. And thereupon the doctrine which is feigned will be one of name rather than of nature: and there will no longer remain an account of the true, but of the pleasing, which the will has rather fitted to the defence of the things that please it, and not one which will rouse the will's instinct through the understanding of what is truly reasonable». Then, after the words *placentium incitat,* omitting as many as he had adduced, the Master excerpted here and there what follows, down to *foedere bellant,* from the same Hilary, ibid. n. 2. Then, returning to Hilary n. 1, in order to take up those few words *Inter veri namque* down to *tuetur,* everywhere after his manner — even in what he takes — he removes, changes, and interpolates something.

la: Vat. male et contra codd. et fere omnes edd. addit *et* ante *impietatis,* et mox legit *obnititur* et *resultat.*

en: The Vatican edition wrongly, and against the codices and nearly all the editions, adds *et* before *impietatis,* and presently reads *obnititur* and *resultat.*

la: II. Cor. 4, 4. et Eph. 2, 2. — Vat. *saeculi huius* pro *huius saeculi,* sed renitentibus omnibus mss. cum edd. 1, 8 atque ipso sacro textu, et mox post *filiis* adiungit *suis* contra codd. et edd. omnes et ipsam Vulgatam, ubi legitur: *operatur in filios diffidentiae.*

en: II Cor. 4, 4 and Eph. 2, 2. — The Vatican edition has *saeculi huius* for *huius saeculi,* but with all the manuscripts resisting, together with editions 1 and 8 and the sacred text itself; and presently, after *filiis,* it adds *suis,* against all the codices and editions and the Vulgate itself, where it reads: *operatur in filios diffidentiae.*

la: Solus cod. E hic addit *sibi.*

en: Codex E alone here adds *sibi.*

en: II Tim. 4, 4.

la: Coloss. 2, 23; Vulgata: Quae sunt rationem quidem habentia in superstitione. Ceterae edd. et omnes codd. relativum *quae* supprimunt eiusque loco punctum ferunt post *coaptare,* dum Vat. et ed. 4 legunt *coaptare, quae habent.*

en: Coloss. 2, 23; the Vulgate: Quae sunt rationem quidem habentia in superstitione. The remaining editions and all the codices suppress the relative *quae* and in its place put a full stop after *coaptare,* while the Vatican edition and ed. 4 read *coaptare, quae habent.*

la: Vat. omittit *vel,* quod restituimus ex Hilario, ex omnibus codd. et edd., excepta 4. Mox pro *amiserit* legitur *amisit* in cod. D et *amiserat* in ed. 2. Utrumque respuunt cum Hilario ceteri codd. et edd.

en: The Vatican edition omits *vel,* which we have restored from Hilary, from all the codices and editions, edition 4 excepted. Presently, for *amiserit,* *amisit* is read in codex D and *amiserat* in ed. 2. The remaining codices and editions, with Hilary, reject both.

la: Codd. A B E et edd. 1, 8 male *omnium* pro *omni.*

en: Codices A B E and editions 1 and 8 wrongly have *omnium* for *omni.*

la: Codd. D E hic male praetermittunt particulam *et.*

en: Codices D E here wrongly pass over the particle *et.*

la: Solus cod. D cum edd. 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9 omittit *et.* Utraque lectio bona, sed facilior sine *et.*

en: Codex D alone, with editions 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, omits *et.* Either reading is good, but the easier is without *et.*

la: Respicitur Matth. 5, 15. — Mox deest *hoc* in codd. A B C et in edd. 1, 8. Deinde codd. D F *et quatuor libris* pro *in quatuor libris.*

en: Reference is made to Matth. 5, 15. — Presently *hoc* is wanting in codices A B C and in editions 1 and 8. Then codices D F have *et quatuor libris* for *in quatuor libris.*

la: Cod. E *invenies.*

en: Codex E has *invenies.*

la: Solummodo Vat. et ed. 4 *incerti* pro *inserti.*

en: Only the Vatican edition and ed. 4 have *incerti* for *inserti.*

la: Edd. 2, 9, 10 *insonuerit.* Tum cod. B bene post *non* adiungit *tamen;* deinde cod. A *liminibus* pro *limitibus.*

en: Editions 2, 9, 10 have *insonuerit.* Then codex B rightly adds *tamen* after *non;* then codex A has *liminibus* for *limitibus.*

la: Ex August. de Trin. III. n. 1, quibusdam omissis et nonnullis additis; in quo textu superflue et contra originale codd. A B D E cum edd. 1, 4, 5, 6, 7 post *etiam* addunt *et.*

en: From August., *de Trin.* III, n. 1, some things being omitted and several added; in which text codices A B D E, with editions 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, superfluously and against the original add *et* after *etiam.*

la: In Vat. ac edd. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 nec non cod. A desideratur *collecta.* Paulo ante legitur *revolvere* pro *evolvere* in ed. 1.

en: In the Vatican edition and editions 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, and likewise in codex A, *collecta* is wanting. A little before, *revolvere* is read for *evolvere* in ed. 1.

la: Paulo aliter apud August. ibid. n. 2, cuius integer locus, cum sit brevis, describitur: Sane cum in omnibus litteris meis non solum pium lectorem, sed etiam liberum correctorem desiderem, multo maxime in his, ubi ipsa magnitudo quaestionis, utinam tam multos inventores habere posset, quam multos contradictores habet.

en: Somewhat differently in August., ibid. n. 2, whose whole passage, since it is short, is here set down: Indeed, since in all my writings I desire not only a devout reader but also a free corrector, much most of all in these, where the very magnitude of the question — would that it could have as many discoverers as it has contradictors. ---

translators_notes:
**Provenance.** Latin re-set from the IA djvu OCR (`raw/bonaventure_vol1_raw.txt`, raw L11102–11282)
with **both printed pages read at the plate** (`raw/vision/vol1/p-016.png`, `p-017.png`, 450 dpi,
2028 × 2986 px; offset `pdf = printed + 102`) as the arbiter of the page span, of every footnote
marker position, of the marginalia and of every apparatus digit. Both leaves were extracted for this
chunk; neither was on disk. English is a fresh literal translation. **Every apparatus entry was read
off a 2.2–2.4× footer band** (`tools/footcrop.py`), never off a whole-page view.

**Page span, fixed positively.** Opens at the full-measure `PROLOGUS MAGISTRI` display heading at the
head of **p. 16** (raw L11102, which the OCR renders `PR0L0GU8 MAGI8TRI`), and closes on
`Explicit prologus.` in the right column of **p. 17** (raw L11282), against the
`INCIPIUNT CAPITULA PRIMI LIBRI SENTENTIARUM` display heading standing immediately below it on the
same leaf (raw L11285). **Both ends are display matter; no white space was read.**

**⚠⚠ THE RAW IS MARGINALIA-CONTAMINATED IN THE OPENING SENTENCES, AND THE VOL I "OCR IS
AUTHORITATIVE" RULE IS DEGRADED THERE — BUT ONLY THERE.** p. 16's single outer-margin gloss is set
line-by-line beside the first seven lines of Lombard's text, and the raw splices its fragments
*inside* the body: `1™%^*°-`, `haeretka™ *^"'"`, `praviuitis`, `movent ad`, `''imToc"`, `"■""'^` all
stand between *Cupientes* and *statuentes.* Those lines were re-set from the plate; the rest of the
unit's raw is sound and was used as the base, corrected at the plate only where noted below.
**p. 17 carries no marginalia at all** — the gloss apparatus stops with the first leaf.

**Apparatus: 23 entries.** p. 16 nn. 1–9 · p. 17 nn. 1–14. **Nothing was inherited:**
`bon-sent-I-proem-q4` forwarded nothing, and p. 16 is a fresh leaf whose whole register answers to
anchors in this chunk (n. 1 to the display heading itself, which carries the anchor).
**Forwarded to `bon-sent-I-capitula`: p. 17 nn. 15–22.** n. 15 (*Hanc tabulam exhibemus, adhibitis 19
codicibus mss.*) anchors on the `INCIPIUNT CAPITULA` heading and nn. 16–22 on entries in the chapter
table itself; ownership was verified by anchor on the plate. ⚠ As always, that hand-off states which
notes are the next chunk's — **it states nothing about where they land.**

**★ BLOCK STRUCTURE AND ANCHOR STRUCTURE COME APART ON BOTH LEAVES, AND ON p. 17 BY FOUR NOTES.**
p. 16: block **6/3** (nn. 1–6 in the left block, nn. 7–9 in the right) against anchors **4/5** —
n. 1 anchors in the full-measure display heading, which belongs to neither column, and n. 6 anchors
at *Christi caritas ⁶»,* three lines into the **right** column. p. 17: block **12/10** (nn. 1–12
left, nn. 13–22 right) against anchors **8/6** for this chunk's fourteen — nn. 9–12 print in the
**left** block but anchor in the **right** column (*reperies ⁹ · inserti ¹⁰ · insonuit ¹¹ ·
necessarius ¹²*). **Read anchors, only anchors.**

**★ THE GUTTER IS A PROPERTY OF A REGION HERE TOO, AND THE TWO VALUES DIFFER BY 11 px.** p. 16 body:
band 1052–1099 (48 px), centre rule 1073–1077 → **1075**, twelve windows agreeing exactly. p. 17
**body**: band 902–944 (43 px), rule 916–928 → **923**; p. 17 **footer register**: band 911–957
(47 px), rule 931–937 → **934** — and the footer windows fork (four of twelve report 959 on a 96 px
run, the artifact of the short left block). The footer bands were cropped on the footer's own value.
The leaf stacks three measures — two-column body, the two-column chapter table, and the register —
which is the p. 313 species from Vol V, in Vol I.

**Digits settled at the plate against the raw.** Five corrections, all in the apparatus and all in
the documented confusion classes. p. 16 n. 2: raw `Marc. i2, 12` → plate **`Marc. 12, 42`** (the
widow's two mites; Mark 12:42 is the verse, and the `1`/`4` class fired on the second digit).
p. 16 n. 9: raw `edd. i, 8` → **`edd. 1, 8`**. p. 17 n. 7: raw `edd. I, 2, 3, .3, 7, 8, 9` → plate
**`edd. 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9`** (the `3`/`5` class, and a run in ascending order settles it).
p. 17 n. 8: raw `Matth. 5, 13` → plate **`Matth. 5, 15`** — the `3`/`5` class again, and the sense
agrees independently, the anchor standing at *lucernam veritatis in candelabro exaltare volentes.*
p. 17 n. 13: raw `edd. 3, 5, 6, 7, 9 nec non cod. A` (with `4` lost to a line-break garble) → plate
**`edd. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9`**. Sigla runs (`A B C`, `A B E`, `A B D E`, `C F P Q R S T`, `D F`,
`G H L M`) were each read at 2.2× and the raw is right in all of them.

**⛔ TWO DEFECTIVE SORTS, BOTH TRANSCRIBED AS PRINTED — AND THE FIRST IS A TURNED LETTER IN THE
BODY, WHICH IS A CLASS THIS CORPUS HAS NOT MET BEFORE.**
1. **p. 16, right column, the head of the second paragraph prints `« Qnamvis ⁷ non ambigamus`** —
   confirmed at 7×: the second sort is an `n` (arch above, feet below), identical to the `n`s in the
   *non* three words later, not a `u`. It is a **turned `u`**, a compositor's error; the word is
   *Quamvis,* and Quaracchi's own note ⁷ quotes Hilary's *Quamvis enim omne dictum* on the same page.
   **Transcribed as printed, on the same discipline as q1's `thelogorum` and q4's `pauisper`;** the
   English renders the sense (*Although*). Not flagged: neither the ink nor the word meant is in
   doubt.
2. **p. 16 n. 4 prints `Omnes codd. et edd. cum. Vat. legunt`** — a stray point after *cum,* sitting
   on the baseline like a period at 3×. Transcribed as printed; the English renders *with the
   Vatican.*

**Marginalia, trimmed from the body and transcribed here** (standing Vol I convention). — p. 16, one
gloss only, set beside the opening seven lines of the left column: *Amor catholicae veritatis, et
odium haereticae pravitatis Magistrum movent ad aggrediendum hoc opus.* — p. 17: **none.** ⚠ This is
the gloss whose fragments the raw splices into the body (see above); it is one continuous sentence
set narrow, not seven separate glosses.

**Register (this unit is Lombard's, not Bonaventure's, and these are its own).** *gazophylacium* →
"treasury" · *paupercula* → "the poor widow" (Quaracchi's n. 2 names Luke 21:2, so the feminine is
the widow of the two mites, not "a poor little thing") · *supererogare* → "to spend beyond" ·
*bigae* → **"two horses"** (Augustine's team of *lingua ac stilus,* kept concrete as the note's own
quotation keeps it) · *placitum* → **"the pleasing"** throughout, held against *veri* → "the true",
since Hilary's antithesis (*non veri, sed placiti rationem*) is the argument · *ratio* → "account"
in that antithesis, and in *Habent rationem sapientiae in superstitione* · *diffidentiae filii* →
"sons of diffidence" (the Vulgate's own word, which the note quotes) · *hypocrisis mendax* → "a lying
hypocrisy" · *pruriginem aurium* → "an itching of the ears" · *sine foedere bellant* → "war without a
treaty" · *littera* → the unit's own name, left untranslated in the id and rendered "the Master's
text" wherever the commentary refers to it.

**⛔ THE THREE GUARD-RAIL AUDITS CANNOT SEE THIS CHUNK.** `audit-paraphrase.py`, `audit-headers.py`
and `audit-apparatus-count.py` all select on `bon-sent-{I,II,III,IV}-d(\d+)-`; a `distinctio: 0`
front-matter chunk never matches, and all three print a clean verdict on **0 chunks audited**.
**`audit-paraphrase.py --min-d 0 --max-d 0` additionally OVERWRITES
`manual-review/d1-d40-paraphrase-audit.md` with an empty report** (found at q4) — it was not run
here. This chunk was verified instead by marker pairing and structural parity in `build-content.mjs`,
by `polish-style-scan.py` and `build-citations.py` on the full corpus, and by plate discipline on
both leaves.

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

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