Jump To Artifact

At 15:6 (ll. 16–17 [on my count]), the VMR transcription reads: περιεϲχωμενοι, noting that the ed. princ. had περιεϲζωμεονι instead. What's the rationale for this? Looking at the high-res image (and having checked the papyrus itself upon making my initial transcription) the letter in question completely lacks the second diagonal, which would be necessary for the chi. Note also that the letter is conjoined in a somewhat cursive manner to the top bow of the preceding sigma—which is in such situations not unusual with a zeta, but abnormal with a chi. Just a thought.