OPENING PAGE of Chrestomathia III. Printed heading III. VITAE PROPHETARUM. with
the sub-line (E tribus codicibus Musei Britannici.) — the heading eats the space of three
lines, which is why this page carries 17 text lines against 20 on every full page of the piece.
⛔ Nestle names NO individual British Museum shelfmark here or on any page of this shard; the
three codices are identified only collectively in the sub-line. There is no witness field in
the schema and that gap is a known finding.
Lines 1-3 are the piece's own title and attribution; the first Life (ISAIAH) opens on line 4. Lines 1-4, read from the plate and agreeing with the calibration supplied to this shard: 1 ܬܘܒ ܫܡ̈ܗܐ ܕܢܒܝ̈ܐ ܩܕܝ̈ܫܐ ܆ ܘܡܢ ܐܝܟܐ 2 ܐܝܬܝܗܘܢ ܗܘܘ ܆ ܘܐܝܟܐ ܡܝܬܘ ܀ ܕܩܕܝܫܐ 3 ܐܦܝܦܢܝܘܣ ܐܦܝܣܩܘܦܐ ܕܩܘܦܪܘܣ ܂ 4 ܐܫܥܝܐ ܡܢ ܐܘܪܫܠܡ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܂ ܡܝܬ On line 2 the end mark is printed as a THREE-dot cluster, not a diamond; on line 1 and line 2 the pause is the two-dot form. Line 5 begins ܕܝܢ ܡܢ ܐܝ̈ܕܝ … ('… he died, at the hands of …'), and line 6 carries ܕܪܘܓܝܠ (Rogel) — i.e. the full Life, sawn by Manasseh and buried by Rogel, far beyond the Latin capitulum's one-sentence item XI.
⭐ Line 4 was RE-VERIFIED against the plate in the keying pass, tail included: ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܂ ܡܝܬ stands as supplied.
Read from the plate on this page, not inherited. NO vowel sign of either tradition appears anywhere on the page. What IS printed: (a) seyame over plurals, (b) the rish/dalath point and the qushshaya/rukkakha points on individual letters, (c) pause points (single low point, two-dot), (d) the linea occultans bar over the elided letter of enclitics (ḥwa, ḥu, ḥy, ʾno …), (e) an end-of-section mark where a Life closes. This matches Chrest. II (c079-1) and contradicts nothing: across all six pages of this shard (pp. 86-91) the layer is CONSTANT — there is no alternation of the kind Chrest. I showed by caput.
Th. Schermann, PROPHETARUM VITAE FABULOSAE, Teubner 1907 — archive.org prophetarumvita00schegoog. Latin version of the Syriac (cod. Sinait. syro 10) at pp. 105-106, leaf = page + 74 (calibrated on two running heads); Index nominum propriorum at printed p. 240. ⛔ The Latin Appendix is a two-page CAPITULUM (a summary list of 22 prophets), not the full Lives — SENSE-level control only, and a thin one. It catches a mis-keyed name or a meaningless sentence; it never adjudicates pointing and cannot be aligned page-for-page. See research/syriac-peshitta-editions.md
1-17. Marginal numbers PRINTED and READ in the LEFT (outer) margin: 5 (against printed line 5), 10 (line 10), 15 (line 15). ⚠ A marginal '1' is NOT visible in the margin strip on this scan; the piece's numbering nevertheless starts at 1 on this page, which the 5/10/15 spacing fixes independently.
Conventions DECLARED for this piece (they must match r3/c079-1.toml); no codepoint was read by eye: · seyame → U+0308 combining diaeresis on the letter it sits over · linea occultans → U+0304 combining macron over the elided letter · single low point → ܂ · two-dot pause → ܆ · diamond / 4-dot / 3-dot end mark → ܀ · a full stop printed on the baseline → ܂ The qushshaya/rukkakha and participle points that the plate DOES carry on individual letters are NOT transcribed — they are below the resolution at which this pass can be honest, and their absence here is a KNOWN GAP, not a claim the plate lacks them. ⛔ Nestle's square brackets mark HIS EXEMPLAR'S GAPS, not textual doubt; where they occur they are kept as printed. (None occur on this page; the one bracket of the shard is on p. 90.)
DOUBT MARKERS used in text_syr_voc:
· ⟨?ܟܟܟ⟩ — a doubtful word, carrying this pass's best reading inside the brackets.
· ⟨?WORD NOT READ⟩ — a single word position, on an otherwise readable line, for which no
reading at all could be proposed. Distinct from ⟨?…⟩: there is no guess to check.
· ⟨?LINE NOT READ⟩ — the whole printed line defeated this pass. It stands in position so that
the line count of text_syr_voc still equals lines_per_page.
ܬܘܒ ܫܡ̈ܗܐ ܕܢܒܝ̈ܐ ܩܕܝ̈ܫܐ ܆ ܘܡܢ ܐܝܟܐ ܐܝܬܝܗܘܢ ܗܘܘ ܆ ܘܐܝܟܐ ܡܝܬܘ ܀ ܕܩܕܝܫܐ ܐܦܝܦܢܝܘܣ ܐܦܝܣܩܘܦܐ ܕܩܘܦܪܘܣ ܂ ܐܫܥܝܐ ܡܢ ܐܘܪܫܠܡ ܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ ܂ ܡܝܬ ܕܝܢ ܡܢ ܐܝ̈ܕܝ ܡܢܫܐ ܂ ⟨?ܘܐܬܩܒܪ⟩ ⟨?ܠܬܚܬ⟩ ⟨?ܒܡܣܩܢܐ⟩ ⟨?ܕܡ̈ܝܐ⟩ ܂ ܘܐܬܬܣܝܡ ܬܚܝܬ ܒܠܘܛܬܐ ܕܪܘܓܝܠ ܆ ܕܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܥܠ ܓܢܒ ⟨?ܡܦܩܢܐ⟩ ܕܡ̈ܝܐ ܂ ܗܢܘܢ ܕܐܘܒܕ ܚܙܩܝܐ ⟨?ܕܢܛܪ⟩ ܐܢܘܢ ܂ ⟨?ܘܐܠܗܐ⟩ ⟨?ܐܬܪܐ⟩ ܕܫܝܠܘܚܐ ⟨?LINE NOT READ⟩ ⟨?LINE NOT READ⟩ ⟨?WORD NOT READ⟩ ܡܛܠ ܗܘܐ ⟨?ܐܬܩܪܝ⟩ ܫܝܠܘܚܐ ܂ ܕܡܬܦܫܩ ⟨?LINE NOT READ⟩ ⟨?LINE NOT READ⟩ ⟨?LINE NOT READ⟩ ⟨?LINE NOT READ⟩ ⟨?LINE NOT READ⟩ ⟨?LINE NOT READ⟩
NONE on this page. The foot of the page was cropped and read: there is no rule and no footnote below the last text line. ⭐ That holds for the whole shard — Nestle prints pp. 86-91 with no philological apparatus at all; the only apparatus is the marginal line numbers, the Syriac page numeral at the head, and the section rubrics.
keyed from the plate, UNVERIFIED: 9 of 17 lines carry a reading and 8 carry none; 51 word positions keyed, of which 9 are flagged uncertain and 1 could not be read at all; no Syriac-reading control exists for this piece.
⭐ THE TEXT IS NOW KEYED AS FAR AS IT HONESTLY GOES, AND EVERY DOUBTFUL WORD IS FLAGGED. The capability limit below is no longer a reason for omission; it is the reason the flags are there.
MEASUREMENT (this page, this pass): · lines 1-4 were supplied to the shard independently and re-checked against the plate; they agree word for word and are counted as READ, not as this pass's own work. · of the 13 lines this pass attempted on its own (5-17), FIVE carry a full reading (5, 6, 7, 8, 11) and EIGHT are marked ⟨?LINE NOT READ⟩ (9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17) — a 38% line yield on lines attempted, 53% (9/17) counting the supplied lines. · across the 9 lines that carry a reading, 51 word positions are keyed: 41 clean (20 of them from the supplied lines 1-4), 9 wrapped ⟨?…⟩ with a best guess, 1 ⟨?WORD NOT READ⟩. Of the 31 word positions this pass read for itself, 21 are clean and 10 are marked. · COST: 20 plate-image reads for this one page — 7 half- or third-width strips of 4-6 lines each, plus 13 narrower crops and single-word zooms — on top of the band-detection runs. A doubtful word costs about one extra image read to resolve, and often does not resolve.
WHY THE YIELD IS WHAT IT IS. The plate has resolution to spare: cropped horizontally to a third of the page width the individual Estrangela letterforms are sharp, the seyame and the rish/dalath points are unambiguous, and Nestle's own alphabet table (p. 4, leaf n21) serves as the letterform key. The limit is not the scan. It is that reading Estrangela here means naming each glyph in sequence and then recognising the word, and this pass's glyph-by-glyph identification is reliable enough to recover a word it can already anticipate (ܡܛܠ, ܗܘܐ, ܐܢܘܢ, ܬܚܝܬ, ܕܪܘܓܝܠ, ܕܫܝܠܘܚܐ, ܕܡܬܦܫܩ, ܕܐܝܬܘܗܝ) and NOT reliable enough to recover an unfamiliar one from letters alone. That is why the readable words cluster on the narrative's proper names and formulae and why whole lines of ordinary Syriac prose drop out. It is also a warning about the readable ones: where a guess looks apt, the aptness may be coming from the sense, not from the letters.
WHAT IS STILL OWED: the 8 unread lines, and confirmation of the 9 flagged words, by a reader of Estrangela or by an HTR pass with a blind control on a sample (cf. [[reference_arabic-control-rule]]). Everything structural in this record — page numeral, line count, marginal numbers, layer, absence of footnotes, section boundaries — is independent of the text and stands as measured.
CONTROL EXERCISED, and its limit stated plainly. Schermann's Appendix (pp. 105-106,
leaf 179 in prophetarumvita00schegoog) is a LATIN CAPITULUM — a bare list of 22 prophets with
tribe, date and burial place. It has no parallel at all to most of this page.
WHAT IT DID CONFIRM: (a) the attribution in lines 2-3 — the Syriac names ܐܦܝܦܢܝܘܣ ܐܦܝܣܩܘܦܐ ܕܩܘܦܪܘܣ, and Schermann's colophon reads 'Haec autem conscripserunt Epiphanius de Cypro et Cornel(i)us de Ierusalem'; (b) that the piece is a list of prophets 'quibus temporibus fuerint … et ubi obdormierit unusquisque', which is exactly what lines 1-2 announce; (c) that Isaiah belongs to this collection (item XI).
WHAT IT CANNOT DO: item XI reads only 'Isaias fuit in diebus Oziae et Ioathan et Achaz et Ezechiae, regum Iuda, eratque ex tribu Iuda, et mortuus est ac sepultus in Ierusalem.' The Syriac here is a full narrative (Manasseh, the sawing, Siloam, Rogel) and the Latin has none of it. The control adjudicates NO letter, NO point, and NO line of this page.
UNCERTAIN READINGS, by line — every ⟨?…⟩ in text_syr_voc:
line 5 ⟨?ܘܐܬܩܒܪ⟩ · ⟨?ܠܬܚܬ⟩ (a two-dot mark stands over the third letter and a final
yudh with a descender follows, neither of which the guess accounts for) ·
⟨?ܒܡܣܩܢܐ⟩ (six letters; only the leading beth and the final alaph are secure)
line 6 ⟨?ܕܡ̈ܝܐ⟩ — the FIRST word of the line. Dalath and final alaph are secure; the
middle is read across from the ܕܡ̈ܝܐ on line 7, which is a shape match, not a control.
line 7 ⟨?ܡܦܩܢܐ⟩
line 8 ⟨?ܕܢܛܪ⟩ (the dalath point below and the rish point above are both visible; the two
medial letters, one a tall crossing stroke, are unresolved) · ⟨?ܘܐܠܗܐ⟩ · ⟨?ܐܬܪܐ⟩
line 11 ⟨?ܐܬܩܪܝ⟩; and the line's FIRST word is ⟨?WORD NOT READ⟩ — no guess is offered.
WORDS IDENTIFIED ON LINES THAT ARE OTHERWISE ⟨?LINE NOT READ⟩, recorded so the next reader does
not start cold — these are NOT in text_syr_voc because their positions in the line could not be
fixed: line 9 carries ܡܛܠ twice; line 10 appears to carry ܢܦܫܗ and ܕܡ̈ܝܐ and to end ܠܗ;
line 12 ends ܕܢܒܝܐ followed by a word under seyame; line 13 carries ܕܐܫܥܝܐ and, just before
it, a word most like ܨܠܘܬܗ; line 14 carries ܡܛܠ ܕܐܝܬܘܗܝ ܗܘܐ; line 17 carries ܗܘܘ and
ends ܥܠ.
⛔ NONE of the above was adjudicated against Schermann. The Latin capitulum contains no sentence any of it could be checked against. Where a reading looks apt to the narrative (Manasseh, Rogel, Siloam, Hezekiah) that aptness came from the Syriac already read on lines 1-8, not from the control — and it is a source of bias, not a confirmation.