A manuscript scholar examines a medieval text that appears to have been written by one scribe. The scribe copied different sections from two older source copies, both of which survive. Although the manuscript's spelling conventions shift several times, the scholar hypothesizes that the scribe retained the conventions of whichever source was being used rather than imposing personal conventions. According to this hypothesis, the shifts reflect switches between sources rather than changes in the scribe's preferences or the participation of additional scribes, which would generally be indicated by consistent differences in letter formation.
Which finding from a detailed comparison would most directly support the scholar's hypothesis?
For a command-of-evidence question involving competing explanations, translate the preferred explanation into several testable predictions and compare every option against all of them. Give particular weight to evidence that shows the predicted direction of an effect while also addressing the strongest alternative explanation.
Hints
Separate the competing explanations
Determine what evidence would distinguish the influence of a source copy from a lasting change in the writer or the arrival of another writer.
Consider direction, not just timing
A change occurring at a source switch is most informative if the new forms can be connected to one of the two sources.
Look for a reversible pattern
Consider what should happen if the same writer later resumes using a source that was used earlier.
Step-by-step Explanation
Identify the hypothesis's predictions
If the scribe retained each source's conventions, spelling should change when the source changes and should move specifically toward forms common in the newly used source. Evidence of stable letter formation would also weigh against the participation of additional scribes.
Check the direction and reversibility of the changes
A mere coincidence between spelling shifts and source switches is insufficient. The manuscript should adopt the new source's spellings, and resuming an earlier source should restore the associated earlier pattern rather than leave a permanent change.
Select the complete finding
The correct finding satisfies all these expectations: letter formation remains stable, spelling follows the newly used source, and the earlier pattern returns when the earlier source is used again. Together, these details support source-dependent copying more directly than the alternatives do.