Linköping Diocesan Library, Kl f 10
Astronomical Miscellany
mid-15th c.
paper
ii, 202, ii' leaves
195 × 132 mm
Greek
The faded rubric has been filled in later, probably incorrectly, and the reference to Georgius Chrysococces’s Expositio in syntaxim Persarum in the margin is misleading. We thank Alberto Bardi for conveying this information to us; Bardi is at present working on a doctoral thesis and critical edition of the anonymous text.
For other manuscripts containing this text, see the article by Anne Tihon. Our manuscript, however, is not included in the list.
ff. 1ar–1bv, which precede the beginning of the text, are blank except for an owner’s note.
On f. 23r there is a description on how to convert Byzantine, Persian, and Arabic calendars; here we find the phrase ‘ὑποδείγματος οὖν χάριν ἐλάβομεν τὸ παρὸν ἔτος, ἤτοι τὸ ͵ϛϟιζ’, the present year being 1409, something which might be of interest as a terminus post quem for the text (or the copy).
One phrase is found in Georgios Gemisthos Plethon, De Astronomia: Μοῖραι μὲν ἐπὶ μοίρας πολλαπλασιαζόμεναι μοίρας ποιοῦσιν. Perhaps this is the short treatise by Plethon also preserved in Vindob. Phil. gr. 140, , fol. 78–90 and Palat. gr. 278, , fol. 135ff.
A marginal comment on f. 33r gives a reference to a passage in Hudson (1698–1712), vol. 3, p. 16: ‘C’est sans doute: Anonymi expositio totius mundi’.
f. 39v is incomplete and in a different hand.
f. 40r is blank.
The text is a translation of and commentary to Immanuel ben Jacob Bonfils’s work Šes kenafayim. It is sometimes mistakenly attributed to Georgius Chrysococces; cf. Neugebauer (1975), vol. 1, p. 13.
Cf. MS BL, Burney 92, , fol. 226r (text no. 16). See also Theodorus Meliteniotes, De astronomia libri tres, Leurquin (1990–1993), vol. 2, pp. 8–598, ending similar to ch. 2, line 23. NB: only Books I–II are edited and available on TLG, so that it is possible that the extract in the ms comes from the third book.
On f. 120r a larger initial and the rubric ‘περὶ σεληνιακῶν ἐκλείψεις’.
On f. 120v a section on squared numbers: ‘Τῶν μετὰ ῥητῶν τετραγόνων ἀριθμῶν εὐχερής’, etc. Cf. Fabricius (1790–1809), vol. 11, p. 129: De inventione quadraticorum laterum irrationabilium numerorum quadratorum.
Further tables containing geographical names and distances.
A digitization of Gustaf Wilhelm Gumaelius’s edition is available via and .
The red ink has all but disappeared; thus, the rubrics, subtitles, initials, and introductory lines of text in-between sections are not distinguishable. Cf. Denis Pétau’s printed text for the more complete text.
See also ms Bav. Vat. gr. 1059, , fol. 205r–218v; 219r–223v (on Easter).
On f. 166v there is a table with various letters/numbers, which is not found in the printed text.
Another text seems to be inserted on ff. 170v–172v. The section on the calculation of Easter is picked up again in the last paragraph of f. 172v (‘Τούτων δὴ οὖν τῶν κατὰ τὸν ἥλιον’).
A comparison with Denis Pétau’s edition shows that its ending equals f. 178r line 18 (expl. ‘ἀξιόλογον ἀπεργαζομένης’). In our ms there are another seven lines of text, beginning with ‘ [--- chars ---]σοὶ δ’ αὐτῷ συνετῶς γε ὄντι καὶ κρίνειν’.
The table on f. 187r ought to belong to one of the texts by Isaac Argyros, either the preceding or the following one, but not clear how.
The text breaks off early. This is another instance of the text already present on ff. 166r–170r, 172v–178r.
Cf. the text ‘Περὶ γεωργίας’ in Scorialensis Iota. R. 14, , fol. 179, edited by Carlo Oreste Zuretti. In our ms there are another three lines of text, on the auspicious time for bloodletting etc.: ‘οὔσης ἐν Ταύρῳ, Λέοντι καὶ Τοξότῃ, δεῖ ποιεῖν τὰς τῶν αἱμάτων ἀφαιρέσεις· ἐν δὲ Ζυγῷ Σκορπίῳ Ὑδροχόῳ μεθ’ ὑποσταλῆς· ἐν δὲ Κριῷ Διδύμῳ Αἰγοκέρωτι Καρκίνῳ Ἰχθύσι Παρθένῳ οὐ δόλως ποιεῖν δεῖ’.
The greater part of the text equals Stefan Weinstock’s edition based on Oxoniensis Seldenianus 16 (=Seldenianus Supra 17), , fol. 177v–179v, except for a lacuna in our ms from ‘οἱ δὲ Ἰχθύες ἐν ἁμφοτέροις τοῖς ἡμισφαιρίοις’ to ‘πάντα μὲν οὖν τὰ προδεδηλωμένα ἄστρα’. In the first few lines there is a reference to Aratus’s Phaenomena.
Support
Textblock
Watermark 1
ff. 5–79/166–188,Watermark 3
ff. 90–95/108–109,Watermark 6
ff. 158/163–165,Watermark 7
ff. 199/200,Foliation
Collation
Textblock
Original composition not possible to reconstruct due to extensive restoration.Script
Textblock
Hand 1
(ff. 1r–80v, 181r–184v, 186r–188v) A typical scholarly Renaissance hand writing in a minute module in light brown ink, now partly faded and hardly legible; astrological/nomical signs are employed frequently, as well as abbreviations; despite the compression, some letters are flourished in their ligatures and others a little enlarged and made more prominent, such as Taus and Etas. In the tables, the minute letters appear compressed in the sense of their height.Hand 2
(ff. 29r–29v, 179r–179r) A less orderly and more wavy hand; the ink is darker, the module slightly bigger; it is probably also responsible for the correction at (f. 1v). On (f. 27v) a scholion perhaps in a different hand.Hand 3
(ff. 81r–107v, 126r–148v, 150r–157r, 196r–197v) Set in a different framework for the tables, in a slightly darker ink, is also very small in module but slightly squatter in appearance; the Ksi is drawn in many curves; it is difficult to say if it is the same hand writing all these tables, but in any case the style is very homogeneous.Hand 4
(ff. 111r–124r) Still more minute and compressed, with a forward motion impressed to it by the slanting chis whose descending strokes echo the acute accents sprinkled above the line. The Gamma is often looped while the ligature Epsilon-Ksi is sometimes enlarged out of proportion (e.g. on (f. 117r)). The symbol for sun is used most frequently. This scribe occasionally displays the Epsilon ‘ad ombelico’. He uses simple initials enlarged in the margin; cf. the hand of Isidore Cardinal of Kiev, RGK, vol. 1, no. 155.Additions
Decorations
Binding
Restored and rebound in white parchment by the Swedish National Archives bookbindery in 1952.
Origin
Provenance
Acquisition
Former shelfmarks
- Fant (1784), pp. 103–104.
- Gumaelius (1822).
- Graux (1889), pp. 72–73.
- CCAG, vol. 9:2, pp. 107–108.
- Andrés (1968), pp. 179–180.
- Tihon (1977).
