Woide and Scrivener After the Damage
Woide reportedly saw the trace in 1765 but not in 1785. Scrivener saw a faint remnant in 1861. Their testimony makes deterioration part of the textual evidence.
Open record →Category: The Line That Vanished
6 published records in this controlled archive.
Wettstein Changed His Mind
The strongest historical objection came from a scholar who first acknowledged the fine stroke and later denied it. Wettstein’s reversal must be heard fairly—but it does not erase…
Open record →Mill, Berriman, and the Vanishing Line
In 1707 John Mill changed his first judgment after closer inspection. In 1741 Henry Berriman used magnification and sunlight and reported part of the older stroke. These are…
Open record →Before the Stroke Faded
The earliest English collators treated Alexandrinus as reading θεός, but their evidence must be weighed honestly. Collational silence is not the same thing as a described inspection.
Open record →Two Strokes Between “God” and “Who”
In an uncial manuscript, θεός and ὅς can differ by a transverse line and a sacred overbar. The tiny material difference explains both the controversy and the danger…
Open record →The Codex Was Alexandrinus
The remembered nineteenth-century testimony was real, but it concerned Codex Alexandrinus—not Vaticanus, and not principally Sinaiticus. Getting the manuscript right changes the whole inquiry.
Open record →