WITNESS
THE WORD.

Codex Argenteus, John 7:7

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 33r; facsimile 57; John 7:7; line containing “ni mag so manaseþs fijan izwis”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile pixels were directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s transcription. The object verifies the exact written infinitive fijan in context; it does not establish first use, spoken frequency, or Proto-Germanic ancestry.

Codex Argenteus, John 12:25

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 76v; facsimile 96; John 12:25; line containing “saei fiaiþ saiwala seina”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile pixels were directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s transcription. The object verifies the j-less written form fiaiþ in context; it does not by pixels alone reconstruct the sound change or settle every fian normalization.

Codex Argenteus, Luke 1:71

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 123r; facsimile 145; Luke 1:71; line containing “us fijandam unsaraim”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile verifies written fijandam in the enemies clause. It cannot settle Project Wulfila’s explicit lexical ambiguity between the fijan participle and the lexicalized noun fijands.

Codex Argenteus, Luke 6:27

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 143v; facsimile 186; Luke 6:27; line containing “þaim fijandam izwis”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile verifies written fijandam in the those-hating clause. It does not by pixels alone choose the verbal participle over the identically inflected enemy noun.

Codex Argenteus, Matthew 5:43

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 3v; facsimile 6; Matthew 5:43; line containing “jah fiais fiand þeinana”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile was directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s verse and token analysis. It verifies fiand as the accusative-singular enemy noun immediately after the separate verb fiais; it does not establish first use or spoken frequency.

Codex Argenteus, Matthew 5:44

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 3v; facsimile 6; Matthew 5:44; line containing “frijoþ fijands izwarans”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile was directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s verse and token analysis. It verifies accusative-plural fijands in the love-your-enemies clause; it does not make every identical surface form unambiguously nominal.

Codex Argenteus, Matthew 10:36

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 27r; facsimile 31; Matthew 10:36; line containing “jah fijands mans innakundai is”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile was directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s transcription. It verifies nominative-plural fijands in the household-enemies clause; it does not date lexicalization or the first Gothic use.

Codex Argenteus, Luke 1:74

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 123r; facsimile 145; Luke 1:74; line containing “us handau fijande unsaraize”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile was directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s transcription. It verifies genitive-plural fijande in the enemies clause; it is separate from the ambiguous fijandam three verses earlier on the same folio.

Codex Argenteus, Luke 10:19

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 164v; facsimile 228; Luke 10:19; line containing “ana allai mahtai fijandis”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile was directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s transcription. It verifies genitive-singular fijandis in the power-of-the-enemy clause; it does not resolve the category of other fijand- tokens.

Codex Argenteus, Luke 1:71

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 123r; facsimile 145; Luke 1:71; line containing “þize hatandane unsis”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile pixels were directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s verse transcription. The object verifies written hatandane in context; it does not show the infinitive hatan, establish a first Gothic use, prove spoken frequency, or by pixels alone choose between the formally possible masculine and neuter genitive-plural analyses.

Codex Argenteus, Luke 6:27

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 143v; facsimile 186; Luke 6:27; line containing “þans hatandans izwis”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile pixels were directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s verse transcription. The object verifies written hatandans in context; it does not show the infinitive hatan, establish a first Gothic use, prove spoken frequency, or by pixels alone choose between the formally possible masculine nominative- and accusative-plural analyses.

Codex Argenteus, Luke 3:7

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 129r; facsimile 157; Luke 3:7; line 10 ending “anawairþin hatiza”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile pixels were directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s verse transcription and the historical line locator. The object verifies written hatiza in the wrath-to-come clause; it does not by itself settle the case analysis, establish a first Gothic use, or prove that hatis was the only Gothic wrath noun.

Codex Argenteus, John 7:23

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 94v; facsimile 60; John 7:23; line containing “iþ mis hatizoþ”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile pixels were directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s verse transcription and token locator. The object verifies the glyph sequence transcribed hatizoþ in the anger question; it does not itself write the infinitive hatizōn, mark long ō, establish the morphological parse without grammatical analysis, prove a first Gothic use, measure spoken frequency, or recover prehistoric ancestry.

Codex Argenteus, Matthew 5:44

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

DG 1, fol. 3v; facsimile 6; Matthew 5:44; line containing “þaim hatjandam izwis”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile pixels were directly inspected against Project Wulfila’s verse-level transcription and morphological analysis. The object verifies inflected hatjandam, not a written infinitive hatjan; 510 is a representative point within the official early-sixth-century manuscript dating, not the translation date or first spoken use.

Codex Argenteus, Mark 1:11

LANGUAGE

Gothic

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

Codex Argenteus DG 1, fol. 57v, facsimile 276, Mark 1:11, line containing “sa liuba”

FACSIMILE

Linked

The facsimile pixels were directly inspected against Project Wulfila's verse-level transcription. The object verifies inflected liuba in Mark 1:11, not a written nominative liufs; 510 remains a representative point within the official early-sixth-century manuscript dating.

Heliand manuscript M, enemy command

LANGUAGE

Old Saxon

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

Cgm 25, scan 45, folio 22r; Heliand 1451; line containing fiund hatan

FACSIMILE

Linked

The full-resolution facsimile was directly inspected against Köbler and the LWL transcription. It verifies the written infinitive hatan after fiund, not the macronized lemma hatōn, a first use, or a uniquely emotional interpretation. The numeric year is a representative point inside the cataloged second half of the ninth century.

Heliand manuscript M, arrest scene

LANGUAGE

Old Saxon

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

Cgm 25, scan 142; Heliand 4915; line containing hatandiero hop

FACSIMILE

Linked

The full-resolution facsimile directly verifies hatandiero hop in the arrest scene when aligned with the transcription. It does not by pixels alone decide productive present participle against lexicalized enemy noun; Köbler indexes the same locus under both hatōn and hėttiand. The numeric year is a representative manuscript date.

Heliand manuscript M, Beatitudes persecution clause

LANGUAGE

Old Saxon

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

Cgm 25, scan 41, folio 20r; Heliand 1322; line containing rikioro manno heti

FACSIMILE

Linked

The full-resolution facsimile was directly inspected against Köbler and the LWL transcription. It verifies written heti inside the persecution-and-hostile-speech clause, not the dotted-e normalized headword, a nominative citation form, first use, exact pronunciation, or deeper ancestry. The numeric year is a representative point inside the cataloged second half of the ninth century.

Heliand manuscript M, Pilate question

LANGUAGE

Old Saxon

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

Cgm 25, scan 150; Heliand 5183; line containing hugea hotie

FACSIMILE

Linked

The full-resolution facsimile was directly inspected against Köbler and the LWL transcription. It verifies nominative plural hotie in the phrase about the hearers' hostile minds, not the normalized headword hōti, a first use, exact pronunciation, or either deeper ancestry lane. The year is representative within the cataloged second half of the ninth century.

Heliand manuscript M, accusation before Pilate

LANGUAGE

Old Saxon

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

Cgm 25, scan 152; Heliand 5246; line containing hotean hugi

FACSIMILE

Linked

The full-resolution facsimile directly verifies accusative singular hotean in the hostile-intent phrase when aligned with Köbler and the LWL transcription. It does not establish the normalized headword, first use, pronunciation, or a unique root route.

Beowulf manuscript, Heorot filled with friends

LANGUAGE

Old English

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

Cotton MS Vitellius A XV, fol. 152r; Electronic Beowulf alignment at verse 1018

FACSIMILE

Linked

The Electronic Beowulf line control aligned verse 1018 to folio 152r, and the folio image was directly inspected. The pixels visibly preserve freondum between wæs and afylled. This establishes an inflected written form and local hall-company context; it does not establish the poem’s composition date, first use, every participant’s social relationship, or reconstructed ancestry.

Beowulf manuscript, foe’s footprint

LANGUAGE

Old English

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

Cotton MS Vitellius A XV, fol. 180v, manuscript line 15; Beowulf 2289

FACSIMILE

Linked

The Electronic Beowulf folio image was directly inspected after using its line control to align Beowulf 2289 with folio 180v. The pixels visibly preserve feondes before fotlast. This establishes an inflected written form and local foe context; it does not establish the poem’s composition date, first use, complete Old English semantics, or deeper ancestry.

Bókin dýra, Elucidarius

LANGUAGE

Old Norse

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

AM 674 a 4°, fol. 33v; line corresponding to Eluc674(1989) 158.10

FACSIMILE

Linked

The manuscript pixels were directly inspected against ONP’s transcription. The initial Hatr is visibly legible; the remainder of the phrase was not independently re-edited from the pixels. The object verifies a token in this dated codex, not the noun’s first use, complete semantics, gender by itself, or deeper ancestry.

Holm perg 15 4° folio 89v

LANGUAGE

Old Norse

WITNESS TYPE

Manuscript

LOCATOR

folio 89v, line 20; scan 1722110

FACSIMILE

Linked

The scan pixels were directly inspected against ONP's diplomatic transcription and citation c265666. They verify written hata in the command to love chastity and hate no person; they do not establish the headword's first use, complete paradigm, exact pronunciation, or prehistoric ancestry.