7 published records in this controlled archive.
A modern apparatus gives a necessary editorial summary, not a time machine. Alexandrinus must be judged through its material history, dated observers, transmissional possibilities, and ecclesiastical reception.
Open record →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 →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 →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 →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 →
