Navigation – Plan du site

AccueilNuméros137/1The transmission of (Arabo-)Byzan...

The transmission of (Arabo-)Byzantine astrological texts

The case of MS Vind. phil. gr. 115
Luca Farina
p. 61-95

Résumés

Le manuscrit Vind. phil. gr. 115 inclut plusieurs chapitres astrologiques anonymes traduits de l’arabe au grec byzantin, ainsi que des extraits attribués à ʾAbū Maʿšar al-Balḫī et al-Qabīṣī. Cet article présente une étude détaillée du manuscrit, une discussion de son rôle dans la transmission des textes astrologiques arabo-byzantins, ainsi que l’édition et la traduction anglaise des chapitres anonymes.

Haut de page

Texte intégral

  • 1 Online reproductions and a preliminary analysis of the mentioned manuscripts can be found by search (...)
  • 2 Boer 1962, p. viii-xii. The authorship of this text is disputed: reasons for attributing the text t (...)
  • 3 The reference edition is Hübner 1998. Previous editions include Robbins 1940, and Boll – Boer [1940 (...)
  • 4 Some chapters are published in the appendixes of the CCAG volumes, see László 2022, p. 252-257: 254 (...)
  • 5 Usener 1876, p. 21, and Farina 2022b, p. 233-234.
  • 6 Pingree 2004, p. 373-374, and infra, Section 3.
  • 7 In the pinax (W, fol. 161v) it is indicated as ἀπὸ Σαρακηνῶν βιβλίου, while in the title of the cha (...)

1The significance of the manuscript Wien, ÖNB, phil. gr. 115 [diktyon 71229] (henceforth W)1 for the Greek astrological tradition has been widely recognised since the early 1960s. In 1962, Emilie Boer used it as the main witness of the “Alexandrian recension” of the In Paulum Alexandrinum Commentarium, attributed to Heliodorus in the manuscript.2 Earlier, the manuscript, which contains a few chapters of Ptolemy’s Apotelesmatica,3 was collated by the editors of the treatise. Its significance is not limited to Ancient and Late Antique astrological texts, but extends to Byzantine and Arabo-Byzantine material as well: it is one of the most complete witnesses of the Apotelesmatica and of the De initiis variis by Theophilus of Edessa;4 it contains Greek excerpts attributed to ʾAbū Maʿšar al-Balḫī5 and al-Qabīṣī,6 along with several chapters translated from an anonymous Σαρακηνῶν βιβλίον.7

  • 8 See the bibliography attached to the description of the manuscript, see infra, Appendix 1.
  • 9 Pingree 2004, p. 371-374. For an edition (Arabic and Latin) and an English translation of al-Qabīṣī (...)
  • 10 For an historiographical overview, see Mavroudi 2002, p. 398-399, Mavroudi 2023, and Acerbi – Trizi (...)
  • 11 The date of copying the manuscript, penned in a high-quality Perlschrift written by a single elegan (...)
  • 12 Pingree 1997, p. 64-65.

2David Pingree mentioned W several times,8 most recently in a brief appendix to the Arabo-Latin edition of al-Qabīṣī’s Book of the introduction to the craft of astrology (Kitāb al-mudḫal ʾilā ṣināʿat ʾaḥkām al-nuǧūm, henceforth Intr. astr.).9 There, he published the sole known excerpt of a Greek translation of Intr. astr., together with an independent astrological chapter on fol. 226v. Pingree dated them to circa 960-1111. W represents an important piece of evidence corroborating Pingree’s reconstruction of the transmission of knowledge between the Islamicate and the Byzantine world, and it has been cited several times in the subsequent secondary literature.10 Through the analysis of the contents of W and of MS Firenze, BML, Plut. 28.34 [diktyon 16215] (henceforth L),11 Pingree dated the translation of the bulk of Arabic astrological material into Greek from the mid 10th century to about the year 1000.12 Despite this repeated attention, neither a comprehensive analysis of the manuscript nor an in-depth study of the works it contains has been carried out until now. The present contribution aims at filling this lacuna and is organised as follows: an analysis of the dating and the contents of W [Section 1]; a discussion of its role in the transmission of Arabic astrology into Greek [Section 2]; an edition of the Greek text and the English translation of the astrological chapters contained in its last folios [Section 3]; an updated analytical description of the manuscript [Appendix 1]; and a table illustrating a case of the dissemination of W’s contents in 14th-century Constantinople [Appendix 2].

Section 1: MS Vind. phil. gr. 115: date and contents

3W consists of 229 folios (what is left today of fols. 122/1, 227-228 are three minimal scraps only) written on oriental paper by two contemporary copyists. A copyist (C1) penned fols. 2r-160v, 219r-227r, a different one (C2) fols. 161r-218v, containing the In Paulum Alexandrinum Commentarium (henceforth Comm.). This division matches almost exactly the codicological arrangement of the manuscript, which is composed of two codicological units (W1: fols. 2r-161v; W2: fols. 162r-227r).

  • 13 See for example Hunger 1961, p. 226-227.
  • 14 Text: εἰς τὸ ͵ϛψν ἔτος ἰν(δικτιῶνος) ιε· ἐν μη(νὶ) ὀ(κ)τ(ωβρίῳ)· ϛ τοῦ αὐτ(οῦ) μη(νὸς) ἡμέρᾳ· περὶ (...)

4The manuscript is generally dated to the mid 13th century, certainly before Oct. 6th, 1241,13 for on fol. 33v a later hand (Cb) recorded some circumstances of a solar eclipse that occurred in Constantinople.14 However, a palaeographical analysis suggests dating back the manuscript to the Comnenian period. The script of both copyists is quite similar and, even if C1’s handwriting is of larger modulus than C2’s, and the latter is more cursive and denser than the former, they both certainly had the same graphic culture. This is proved by the following common traits: typologies of single letters: β (in multiple shapes), δ (generally deeply inclined to the left in the minuscule type and with long final stretches to the left in the majuscule type), and ζ (oriented to the right, with the lower trait underlining the following letters) [Plate 1]; ligatures: open ligatures (e.g. αφ, σφ, καὶ-φ) and connecting traits (e.g. ὅτι) [Plate 2]; enlarged circumflex accents; large and including initials (e.g. ε[πι] and σ[υν]); abbreviations with long strokes slanting downwards (e.g. διά, κατά, πρός, φάσις) [Plate 3].

  • 15 On the 12th century scholarly hands to which the production of many scientific manuscripts is attri (...)
  • 16 For parallels of some peculiarities, see Alexius I’s Lavra chrysobulls dating to 1104 and 1109, and (...)
  • 17 Cavallo 2000.

5Both copyists exhibit scholarly hands of the first half of 12th century;15 these are characterised by a marked cursivity, frequent ligatures (not without chancery and calligraphic influences) and abbreviations, duplication of connecting strokes, and enlargement of letters and accents.16 The scripts exhibit the peculiarities of the 11th-12th century “graphic change” highlighted by Guglielmo Cavallo, and belong to the second pole of his classification.17

  • 18 On the top of the folio, above the horoscopic thema one reads: ⟦μηνὶ σεπτ(εμβρί)ω γ⟧ μηνὶ σεπτ(εμβρ (...)
  • 19 For the edition of the text, see infra, Section 3.

6The palaeographical data are corroborated by internal evidence: a datable thema, written by a slightly later hand (Ca) on a blank folio (fol. 6v) located between the table of contents and the beginning of the astrological miscellany in W1, provides a terminus ante quem for the arrangement of the codex: Constantinople, September 10th, 1169.18 A terminus post quem is provided by a horoscopic chapter (its thema is almost completely lost) copied by C1 on the very last readable folios of the manuscript (fols. 226v [l. 7]-227r): Constantinople, March 14th, 1111.19

  • 20 The titles of the following chapters were written on a once-blank now-lost folio.

7On fols. 219r-227r, a sequence of short astrological chapters that also included the Arabo-Byzantine texts on abundance and shortage of goods (henceforth Ar. chh.) has been added by C1 after C2 completed the copying of Comm. This can be inferred from the fact that C1 added the titles of Ar. chh. 41-4220 to the table of contents (fols. 161r-v [l. 21-23]), after the 40 chapters of Comm. That the last two titles on fol. 161v were added later is suggested by the different typology of the proposition περί, written in extenso by C2 and abbreviated by C1. Consequently, the manuscript is the result of three copying acts:

  • fols. 1r-160v by C1 (25 quires, independent quire numbering); very likely at the same time, fols. 162r-218v by C2 (8 quires, independent quire numbering);
  • the table of contents of Comm. by C2 on the last (blank) folios of the 25th quire copied by C1 (fols. 161r-v);
  • Ar. chh. by C1 (fols. 219r-227r), starting from the last (blank) folio of the 8th quire copied by C2, together with the addition of the titles of Ar. chh. in the table of contents, starting from fol. 161v.

8This analysis proves that W is the result of a close collaboration between two Constantinopolitan copyists during the Comnenian period, extending from the later years of Alexius I’s reign (r. 1081-1118) to the middle years of Manuel I’s reign (r. 1143-1180).

  • 21 I offer here some preliminary observations; I will undertake a thorough philological analysis of al (...)
  • 22 The numbering, once reaching 137, was later corrected by Ca.
  • 23 The items in the table are listed alphabetically by author. For a detailed analysis of W, see infra(...)

9The manuscript is organised in two main sections, which correspond almost exactly to the two codicological units W1 and W2. The related tables of contents are on fols. 2r-5v and 161r-v, at the beginning and end of the first codicological unit, respectively.21 The first section comprises an extensive astrological florilegium organised in 150 chapters.22 This florilegium overlaps at times with the one found in L. An overview of the contents of W and L is as follows.23

  • 24 Ed. CCAG, I, p. 142-164.
  • 25 Ed. infra, Section 3.
  • 26 Ed. Wolf 1559; a critical edition by R. Caballero Sánchez is currently in preparation for publicati (...)
  • 27 Ed. Pingree 1973. L and W carry different chapters, with the sole exception of Heph., Apotel., III. (...)
  • 28 Ed. Pingree 1974, p. 47-125.
  • 29 Ed. Kühn 1830, XIX, p. 529-571 and Rovati 2018, p. 82-123.
  • 30 Ed. CCAG, I, p. 138-139.
  • 31 Ed. Hübner 1998. L and W carry different chapters (aside for Ptol., Apotel., II.12-13 [l. 925-1060] (...)
  • 32 Ed. Boer 1962.
  • 33 Ed. CCAG, I, p. 171-172 (l. 20).
  • 34 Partial ed. CCAG, I, p. 140 (l. 16-32).
  • 35 For orientation, refer to the English translation of Theophilus’ works in Dykes-Gramaglia 2017 for (...)

L

W

Antioch., Ep. II24

L, 85r (l. 33)-94v (l. 7)

×

Ar. chh.25

W, 219r (l. 18)-226v (l. 6)

×

Heliod. (?), In Ptol. Apotel.26

L, 29v (l. 31)-59v (l. 32)
[L, 32v (l. 20-26); W, 121r (l. 18)-121v (l. 9)]

×

×

Heph., Apotel.27

L, 115v (l. 9)-123r (l. 11); 157r (l. 14)-v (l. 36); 107v (l. 25)-109v; 123r (l. 12)-124r (l. 9); 152v (l. 27)-153v; 158v (l. 7)-159r (l. 36); 83v (l. 35)-84r (l. 16); 159v (l. 35)-165r (l. 12); 25r (l. 25-36)
W, 17r-22r (l. 11); 25r (l. 16)-73r (l. 3)

×

×

Heph., Ep.228

W, 108v (l. 11)-109v (l. 15); 125v (l. 1-8); 140r-v (l. 13)

×

Hermes, Iatromathematica (+iatromathematical compendium)29

L, 2r (l. 33)-6r (l. 30); 6r (l. 31)-25r

×

Julianus, Frag. (F1)30 (+scholia)

L, 84r (l. 16)-84v (l. 24)
W, 107r (l. 4)-108v (l. 10)

×

×

Ptol., Apotel.31

L, 104r (l. 21)-107v (l. 24), 146r-153v
W, 8r-16v

×

×

⟨ps.-⟩Heliodorus, Comm.32

W, 162r-218v

×

⟨ps.-⟩Syrus, Universal doctrine33

L, 145r (l. 10)-145v (l. 12)
W, 157v (l. 13)-159r (l. 4)

×

×

Scholia (e.g. mention of Photius)34

L, 83v (l. 12-25); 85r (l. 13-31)
W, 116v (l. 8)-117r (l. 10); 121v (l. 9)-122r (l. 12)

×

×

Theoph., Apotel.35

L, 96r-104r
W, 17r-22r (l. 11); 25r (l. 16)-73r (l. 3)

×

×

Theoph., De in. bell.

L, 170v-171v

×

Theoph., De in. cosm.

L, 59v (l. 34)-67r (l. 33)

×

Theoph., De in. var.

L, 69r (l. 16)-82v (l. 12)
W, 83v (l. 6)-106v (l. 9); 109v (l. 15)-114v (l. 3)

×

×

10The above-listed contents can be divided into three categories: texts of which L and W transmit the mostly same chapters; texts of which L and W transmit mostly different chapters; texts of which L and W share at most one chapter.

  • 36 W, fols. 83v (l. 6)-106v (l. 9); 109v (l. 15)-114v (l. 3); L, fols. 69r (l. 16)-82v (l. 12).
  • 37 CCAG, I, p. 138-139. This fragment (up to fol. 84v [l. 40]) is labelled F1 in László 2020, p. 7. As (...)
  • 38 Pingree 1997, p. 65 n. 13 states that ch. 1.13-18 come from an Arabic source, without identifying t (...)
  • 39 Pa, fol. 2v (l. 22), cfr. Hübner 1995.
  • 40 The mention follows the only chapters excerpted from Theoph., De in. bell. in L.
  • 41 1: W, fols. 116v (l. 8)-117r (l. 10); L, fol. 83v (l. 12-25); 2: W, fols. 121v (l. 9)-122r (l. 12); (...)
  • 42 τὸ μικρόν is missing in L. The complete scholium as it reads in W is as follows: Σημείωσαι· ἱστέον (...)
  • 43 CCAG, I, p. 140, and Boll 1899b, p. 158.

11The first category comprises Theoph., De in. var. (catarchic and interrogational astrology), Theoph., Apotel. (general and catarchic astrology), and minor texts and scholia. W and L contain almost the same chapters of Theoph., De in. var.36 (ch. 1.5-7.1). These are preceded, in both manuscripts, by an anonymous chapter (ἐξ ὧν ἡ Σελήνη καὶ οἱ ἀστέρες βλάπτονται) and followed by an anonymous scholium and by a fragment by Julianus of Laodicea.37 W does not contain ch. 1.13-18 (interrogational astrology), 6.2-4 and 9.7 which are included in L.38 The last folio of L, partly torn off, refers to ch. 10.2 with the following indication: ἐκ τοῦ ι κεφαλαίου τῆς δωδεκατρόπου τῶν καταρχῶν. ἐὰν γίνε[ται τοῦτο τὸ πρᾶγμα ἢ οὐ γίνεται].39 This chapter is not contained in V.40 Two sets of scholia to Theophilus’ extracts which are absent in the others witnesses of Theophilus’ works, confirm the close relationship between W and L.41 The first set, placed in both manuscripts soon after the conclusion of Theoph., De in. var., comprises only one scholium, which ends with a reference to the presence of the chapter in the other black book, on the twentieth page from the beginning.42 The second set comprises three scholia, the last of which refers to the (second) exile of Patriarch Photius (886).43

  • 44 W, fol. 86v (l. 1); L, fol. 70r (l. 38), and W, fol. 101v (l. 6); L, fol. 77v (l. 29).

12The analysis of the chapters of Theophilus’ treatises that W and L share confirms both that W and L are closely related and that L was eager for innovating. These two features can be inferred from L’s frequent rephrasing and omissions and by the way W and L deal with common lacunas. There are only four lacunas shared by both manuscripts (no lacuna unique to either of them is present): two lacunas are found in Theoph., De in. var. (in ch. 1.7 and 2.1),44 two in Theoph., Apotel. (in ch. 9 and 11). W indicates a missing sequence of text by leaving a blank space while L either does not indicate the missing sequence or modifies the surrounding sentences in order to adjust the text.

  • 45 W, fol. 37r (l. 10); L, fol. 99v (l. 35).
  • 46 Pa, fol. 46r (l. 2), restores μετάβασιν as a missing word. The meaningless sequence ποιεῖ τὸ in W i (...)
  • 47 W, fol. 45r (l. 14-16); L, fol. 101v (l. 13-14).

13In particular, in Theoph., Apotel., 9, L rephrases the sentence about the outcomes consequent to Saturn transiting in Libra in the northern parts of its orbit, while W leaves it incomplete:45 W, ἂν δ’ ἐν τοῖς βορείοις μέρεσι, ποιεῖ τὸ τὴν […] πνευμάτων;46 L, ἐν δὲ τοῖς βορείοις μέρεσιν ὂν πνευμάτων. In Theoph., Apotel., 11, L omits the reference to the first decan, while W leaves the sentence incomplete:47 W, φάσιν δὲ ποιούμενος ἐν τῷ α δεκανῷ […] ἐν τῷ β; L, φάσιν δὲ ποιούμενος ἐν τῷ β δεκανῷ. These examples prove that W and L derive from the same hyparchetype as regards Theophilus’ extracts, and that W does not derive from L.

  • 48 ⟨ps.-⟩Heliod., Comm. is included in the second unit of the manuscript, nevertheless it is listed he (...)
  • 49 Heph., Apotel., I.3-5, 8-12 (l. 380-445, 488-745); II.12 (l. 936-993); I.12 (l. 746-775); I.14 (l.  (...)
  • 50 Vuillemin-Diem – Steel 2015, p. 51 n. 13.
  • 51 Va is the most complete manuscript used by the editors.
  • 52 Branch ψ is opposed to the branch αβγ. For a discussion of the four-branch stemma proposed in Boll  (...)
  • 53 Ptol., Apotel., II.12-13 (l. 925-1060) are the only chapters witnessed by the branch ψ and they can (...)
  • 54 Vuillemin-Diem – Steel 2015, p. 59-81.

14The second category above (texts shared by W and L but mostly different chapters) includes: Ptol., Apotel.; Heph., Apotel.; ⟨ps.-⟩Heliod., Comm.48 Concerning Ptolemy, W is a witness to Apotel., II.7-14 (l. 754-1086) on fols. 8r-16v, while L carries excerpts from Apotel., I-II on fols. 104r-107r, 146r-153v.49 The textual relevance of W has been mostly ignored by the editors,50 even if the manuscript belongs to the stemmatic branch ψ which has been used as reference branch for the constitutio textus of Ptol., Apotel.. To the same branch are affiliated with L, MS Città del Vaticano, BAV, Vat. gr. 1038 [diktyon 67669] (henceforth Va),51 and the Latin translation probably made by William of Moerbeke (henceforth G).52 A collation of W and a renewed collation of the other witnesses of branch ψ corroborate this affiliation.53 Moreover, it has been shown that G pertains to branch ψ without being dependent from its main witnesses, L and Va.54 It is likely that G is related to W, or to a common hyperarchetype, against Va, as can be inferred from the presence of a conjunctive reading (very likely a gloss incorporated in the text) against the rest of the manuscript tradition: 1080 περὶ αὐτὸν] α ἢ δύο περὶ αὐτὸν W : circa se una uel etiam duas G.

  • 55 W, fols. 120v-121r (l. 10); 132v (l. 2-9); 150v (l. 6)-151v (l. 7).
  • 56 Pingree 1973, p. 229-230. The sigla are those used in Pingree’s edition: A = Paris, BnF, grec 2841 (...)

15V also contains four excerpts of Heph., Apotel. (III.2.6-12, III.8, III.23-24).55 One of them, Apotel., III.2.6-12, can also be found in L, fols. 83v (l. 35)-84r (l. 16). In both manuscripts, the title is ποταπὸν ἕξει τέλος ἕκαστον τῶν πραττομένων γνῶναι οὕτως. Α collation of the common excerpt shows that W and L share several conjunctive mistakes, such as:56 229.27 ἐπίβλεπε AP] ἐπιβλέπου CLW; 230.3-4 τὰ κατ’ ἀρχὴν AP] κατὰ τὴν ἀρχὴν CLW; 230.10 εἶεν AP] εἴη CLW; 230.21 εἴτε P] ἤ τε A : ἢ LW. For the texts included in this category, therefore, L and W often prove to belong to the same stemmatic branch.

16The third category above (texts of which W and L share at most one chapter) includes texts uniquely witnessed by L, such as Epitoma II by Antiochus; a corpus of iatromathematical texts including Hermes’ Iatromathematica; In Ptol. Apotel. by Heliodorus (?); excerpts of Theoph., De in. cosm. and De in. bell.; texts uniquely witnessed by W, such as excerpts of Heph., Ep.2; ⟨ps.-⟩Heliodorus, Comm.; excerpts of ʾAbū Maʿšar Byzantine translations and Ar. chh.

  • 57 The only exceptions are: 1. an excerpt of Heliod. (?), In Ptol. Ap.; 2. ⟨ps.-⟩Syrus, Universal doct (...)
  • 58 L, fols. 144v (l. 29)-145r (l. 10).
  • 59 Supra, n. 11.
  • 60 The text suffers from several lacunas; it makes use of a method ascribed to Theon of Alexandria tha (...)
  • 61 Kunitzsch 1964.
  • 62 CCAG, V.1, p. 214-217 (published on the basis of A, fol.  209r [l. 9]-209v [l. 18], and Pa, fols. 3 (...)
  • 63 CCAG, V.1, p. 212-213.
  • 64 Pingree 1977a, p. 211; László 2020, p. 331-332. Rhetorius’ chapter was re-computed twice, once for (...)
  • 65 The recomputed chapter is also witnessed to in MS Venezia, BNM, Marc. gr. Z. 334 (coll. 553) [dikty (...)

17From the analysis of the contents of W and L it follows that they are two independent florilegia partially stemming from a common source (α). This Urflorileg included the majority of texts witnessed by W, fols. 25r (l. 15)-122r (l. 12) and L, fols. 68v (l. 17)-104 (l. 20). Beside the texts shared by W and L (and most probably already present in α), each manuscript contains texts absent in the other.57 L’s florilegium can be dated to the time interval 907/8-1055; the terminus post quem is L’s latest datable text (έτους [sic] ͵ϛυιϛ ἐποχαὶ τῶν ἀπλανῶν τῶν ἐν τῇ ἀράχνῃ τοῦ ἀστραλάβου [sic]);58 the terminus ante quem is the latest plausible year for the arrangement of the manuscript itself.59 A possible date for W’s florilegium is the first half of the 10th century, for two chapters are dated to years 919 and 930/1, respectively. The first chapter is on fols. 143v (l. 19)-145r (l. 10) and explains how to find the heliacal rising of Sirius (περὶ τῆς τοῦ Κυνὸς ἐπιτολῆς). This is computed for the beginning of the reign of Romanus I Lecapenus and Constantine VII (919-944) and uses the era Menophres.60 The second chapter is on fols. 56r (l. 13)-58r (l. 4) and is Theoph., Apotel., 18, on the conspicuous fixed stars,61 with title τὰ παραλειπόμενα τῶν καταρχῶν τῶν παρανατελλόντων ἀστέρων ἀποτελέσματα ἐν πάσαις καταρχαῖς καὶ ἐρωτήσεσιν.62 The source of this chapter is a text dated to the year 379,63 recomputed by Rhetorius (ch. 58) to fit the year 504/5 (addition of 3;40° to the longitude given by Ptolemy).64 This chapter by Theophilus is transmitted in two different recensions: a first one recomputed to fit the year 770/1 (addition of 6;20°), a second one to fit the year 930/1 (addition of 7;55°).65 The former matches the composition date of Theophilus’ original treatise, the latter is the reworking date of the given chapter (and probably of the entire W recension of Theoph., Apotel.). As neither of these chapters is present in L, it cannot be affirmed that α is datable to the same years. In particular, the terminus post quem and terminus ante quem of α are 886 (based on the reference to the second exile of Patriarch Photius) and circa 1055 (based on the composition date of L), respectively.

  • 66 W, fols. 117r (l. 11)-117v (l. 15); 118r (l. 5)-120r.
  • 67 On the text attributed to Syrus, see Tolsa 2019.

18The florilegia in W and L differ as to the presence of several texts, including a few chapters of obvious Arabic origin, carried by W but absent in L.66 It cannot be said with certainty whether these texts were either included in α but omitted by L or added in W or in a model of it, innovating α. Nevertheless, in L there is no indication of any texts translated from Arabic.67 Thus, it is highly probable that these chapters were added by W, rather than omitted from L. This is confirmed by the anonymous chapter On how the universal Ascendant of the year is found (fols. 226v [l. 7]-227r), which is explicitly dated to March 14th, 1111, and is therefore a later addition in W that was absent in α.

  • 68 Boer 1962, p. x.
  • 69 Boer 1962, p. 8 (ch. 5), and Neugebauer 1962, p. 145-146.
  • 70 Boer’s branch β.
  • 71 Ed. Boer 1962, p. 46 (l. 7)-53 (l. 16), 55 (l. 11)-59 (l. 15), 60-61 (l. 27).

19The second section of W comprises two items only: ⟨ps.-⟩Heliod., Comm. (fols. 161r-218v); an astrological collection which includes Ar. chh. (fols. 219-228). The first item derives from an Alexandrian ancestor.68 This is borne out by ch. 5 (Περὶ ἰσαναφόρων καὶ ὁμοζώνων), where a passage related to the rising of Taurus and Pisces refers to the second klima generally used in Alexandria, and not ἐπὶ τοῦ διὰ Βυζαντίου παραλλήλου,69 as written in the manuscripts stemming from a Byzantine recension.70 The most ancient witness of the Alexandrian recension is L, whose fols. 131r-134v (l. 20) contain excerpts from ch. 22.71 Consequently, the archetype of such a recension was attested in Constantinople before L was copied.

  • 72 CCAG, VIII.4, p. 45-65, Caballero Sánchez 2013a, p. 94-97, and Gioffreda 2020, p. 233-235.
  • 73 On Argyrus, see in general PLP, n. 1285; on his manuscripts, see Gioffreda 2020 (with bibliography)
  • 74 CCAG, I, p. 6-20, Rovati 2018, p. 49-51, and Gioffreda 2020, p. 180-184. The astrological compilati (...)
  • 75 For an overview of the witnesses of the Byzantine recension, see Boer 1962, p. x.
  • 76 For a table showing the contents common to W and G, see infra, Appendix 2.
  • 77 Ed. Pingree 1968.
  • 78 On this manuscript, see at least Acerbi – Gioffreda 2019 (with bibliography).
  • 79 See Caballero Sánchez 2013a, p. 96.

20The most ancient witness of the Byzantine recension is MS Paris, BnF, grec 2507 [diktyon 52139] (henceforth G).72 It is one of the two voluminous astrological miscellanies penned and assembled by Isaac Argyrus73 in the fourth quarter of the 14th century (post 1372/1373), the other being MS Firenze, BML, Plut. 28.13 [diktyon 16194] (henceforth I).74 In particular, most of G’s first codicological unit (fols. 1r-78v) appears to be based on W. Aside the reworked recension of ⟨ps.-⟩Heliod., Comm. on fols. 1r-24v, 33r-39r,75 G reproduces, within the astrological compendium on fols. 41r-75v, 77r-78v, most of the items of W (a notable exception is Ar. chh.).76 The second codicological unit comprises Argyrus’ recension of ʾAbū Maʿšar, De revolutionibus navitatum (fols. 113v-134r, 79r-101v [l. 2]),77 derived from MS Città del Vaticano, BAV, Vat. gr. 191 [diktyon 66822],78 and Heliod. (?), In Ptol. Apotel. (fols. 144r-206v, 25r-31v), likely derived from L.79

21The second item is witnessed by W only and is composed of four sub-items: the anonymous Byzantine version of al-Qabīṣī’s Intr. astr., IV.2 (fol. 219r [l. 1-18]); Ar. chh. (fols. 219r [l. 18]-222r [l. 5]; 222r [l. 20]-226v [l. 6]); ⟨ps.-⟩Doroth., Carmen, III.16 (= Doroth., Carmen, app. IV.1, 5-9); and an anonymous chapter on how to find the universal Ascendant of the year (fols. 226v [l. 7]-227r). The composition date of three of these items can be determined.

  • 80 The erroneous reading ἀγρονομίαν instead of ἀστρονομίαν (fol. 219r [l. 2]) is likely due to the con (...)
  • 81 Burnett – Yamamoto – Yano 2004, p. 2, and Pingree 2004, p. 373.
  • 82 As already noted by Pingree, in the chapter occurs the word ἐξάλλαξις, instead of the more common ἐ (...)

22The Byzantine translation (not without mistakes)80 of al-Qabīṣī’s chapter can be dated to 960/7-1169. The first term are the composition dates of the Arabic original,81 the second term is the terminus ante quem for the arrangement of the manuscript.82

  • 83 Infra, Section 3.
  • 84 The study of the manuscript transmission of the treatise, along with the edition of its Arabic, Gre (...)
  • 85 Pingree 2003, p. 41-57, Pingree in Yamamoto – Burnett 2019, II, p. 1-116, Csorba – Veszprémy 2020 [ (...)

23The Arabic version of Ar. chh. was composed in the time interval 835-1169. This can be inferred from the mentions, in ch. 48, of the eighth ʿAbbāsid Caliph al-Muʿtaṣim (r. 833-842) and of the flood that occurred in Baghdad during his reign, in 835.83 The Byzantine translation can at least be dated to the same time interval. However, the formulaic style and the technical terminology used in Ar. chh. point to a close relation with the Greek translation of the Kitāb [al-muḏākarāt] ʾAbī Maʿšar fī ʾasrār ʿilm al-nuǧūm (The book [of the discussions] of ʾAbū Maʿšar on the secrets of the science of the stars, henceforth Dial. astr.) written by ʾAbū Saʿīd Šāḏān b. Baḥr and included in the second book of the The book of knowledge of astrological secrets by ʾAbū Maʿšar.84 The combined analysis of the two texts suggests narrowing the time span of the Byzantine translation of Ar. chh. to at least 868/9-1092/3.85

  • 86 The manuscript is a computational primer, one of the most important witnesses of the Rechenbücher (...)
  • 87 It occurs on fols. 68r (marg.) (in the genitive case) and in 195r (in the accusative case), see CCA (...)
  • 88 On the manuscript, see most recently Farina 2022b, p. 247-250, Glynias 2022, p. 188-196, and Manfre (...)
  • 89 De Montfaucon 1708, p. 359-360: 359. The only missing symbol in the list provided by de Montfaucon (...)

24In Ar. chh., ch. 50-51 there is a symbol resembling two iotas (ιι) more or less slanted to the right, which is not recorded elsewhere in the manuscript. The symbol occurs twice on fol. 223v (in the genitive case) and once on fol. 224r (in the genitive case). As far as we know, the symbol is recorded in at least two other manuscripts dating to the Comnenian period: MSS Paris, BnF, grec 1670 [diktyon 51293] (henceforth P) dating to circa 1183 (fiscal and metrological texts),86 and Città del Vaticano, BAV, Vat. gr. 1056 [diktyon 67687] (henceforth V),87 likely dating to the late 12th-early 13th century.88 On the basis of P, and in keeping with the meaning of the clauses that contain the symbol in W, this can be resolved as “νόμισμα, νομίσματα”.89A comparison between the symbols in the three manuscripts is provided below.

  • 90 The chapter is published in CCAG, V.1, p. 145-146 (the symbol occurs on p. 146, l. 22) on the basis (...)
  • 91 For an English translation of the Arabic chapter, see Dunlop 1971, p. 235-236. The symbol probably (...)
  • 92 On Pe, see Šangin 1926, and CCAG, XII, p3-6.
  • 93 From the 13th century onwards, the word hyperpyron and nomisma were used interchangeably, see André (...)
  • 94 V, fol. 196r (ch. 14): Εἶπον τῷ Ἀπομάσαρ· ποία ἐστὶν ἐπικρατεστέρα σημασία, ἡ τῶν ζῳδίων ἢ ἡ τῶν ἀσ (...)
  • 95 Hendy 1969, p. 89-96.
  • 96 The second horoscope is preserved solely in Latin, see Csorba – Veszprémy 2020 [2022], p. 86. On th (...)

25The occurrence in V, fol. 195r, in Dial. astr. ch. 5,90 shows that the symbol is used to render the Arabic gold dīnār (pl. danānīr). The chapter tells an anecdote, set at the court of the Caliph al-Maʾmūn (r. 813-833), about the examination by some astrologers of a man who claimed to be a prophet (and who performed some magic tricks), based on the analysis of his Ascendant. After the man renounced his claim to prophecy and explained the tricks he used, he was rewarded by the caliph with 1,000 danānīr.91 The manuscript tradition of Dial. astr. is bipartite, with one branch represented by V, and the other by MS Roma, BA, gr. 29 [diktyon 55936] (henceforth A), its apographs, and an independent manuscript: MS St. Petersburg, BAN, иностранных рукописей O N° 128 [diktyon 56834] (henceforth Pe).92 The symbol occurs identical in both branches, except in Pe, fol. 196r (l. 10), where ιι ͵α is written as (ὑπέρ)π(υ)ρ(α) χίλια. This reading can be dismissed as an innovation by the copyist of the manuscript (dated 1448): the copyist resolved the symbol with the name of the gold coin most common in his time.93 Another element that corroborates the interpretation of the symbol as nomisma and not as hyperpyron is the mention in extenso, in another chapter of Dial. astr., of both nomisma (gold coin) and miliaresion (silver coin).94 The mention of the miliaresion to indicate a silver coin is particularly relevant since it was dismissed after the fiscal reform by Alexius I (1092/3).95 Given the similarity between Dial. astr. and Ar. chh., the shared use of the symbol for nomisma, and the mention of the miliaresion in one of the two texts, it follows that 1092/3 could be taken as erminus ante quem for the translation of both texts. A terminus post quem (868/9) is given by two horoscopes contained in Dial. astr., which provides a date for the composition of the Arabic text.96

  • 97 Ed. CCAG, VI, p. 81, Stegemann 1939, fr. 59, and Pingree 1976, p. 374.
  • 98 Pingree 1976, p. 374.
  • 99 Ed. Pingree 1976, p. 3-158.

26The excerpt attributed to Dorotheus, explicitly identified as taken from Carmen, III.16 (= Doroth., Carmen, IV.1, 5-9),97 is embedded in the Ar. chh. and provides no internal evidence for precise dating. Its authenticity was already questioned by Pingree, who stated: “cum Dorotheo non congruit.”98 As it neither corresponds with the parallel chapter in the Arabic Dorotheus99 nor reflects Dorotheus’ established concepts (e.g., οἰκείωσις as the counterpart of δύναμις), the chapter is more likely a pseudepigraphic work translated from Arabic into Greek alongside the Ar. chh., rather than a authentic fragment from Dorotheus of Sidon.

27The anonymous chapter On how the universal Ascendant of the year is found is explicitly dated to March 14th, 1111 (AM 6619). As shown above, it was not attested in α, and it is an addition of W. Nevertheless, it is not possible to infer the date of copying of W from this chapter due to the presence of at least two copying mistakes: the occurrence of singular nominative ὅριος instead of plural dative ὁρίοις (fol. 226v l. 11, 13), likely resulting from a misinterpretation of a tachygraphic sign, and the wrong case-agreement caused by the occurrence of the plural genitive article τῶν instead of the singular article τῆς (fol. 226v l. 14). These mistakes suggest that the chapter is not an original composition by C1. Therefore, year 1111 can be only used as a terminus post quem for the arrangement of the manuscript.

Section 2: MS Vind. phil. gr. 115 and the translations from Arabic into Byzantine Greek

  • 100 See Pingree 1989, Pingree 1997, p. 63-77, and Pingree 2001. On Pingree’s publications, how to read (...)
  • 101 Pingree 1997, p. 65.
  • 102 Pingree 1997, p. 71. Pingree stressed his opinion in later works, see Pingree 2003, p. 43, Pingree (...)
  • 103 Pingree 1997, p. 74.
  • 104 On John Abramius, his manuscripts, and the links he established with other contemporary scholars (s (...)

28The current opinion about the transmission of astrology from the Caliphate to the Byzantine Empire, and more generally about the translations of astrological writings from Arabic into Greek, was shaped by the reconstruction of the transmission of (astrological) sciences formulated by Pingree in a number of publications.100 In particular, the influx of Arabic astrology into Byzantium (8th-14th century) is articulated in three distinct steps: a “unique event, the coming of Stephanus to Constantinople in about 775”;101 translations “probably around the year 1000”;102 “another translator or group of translators […] active in the 13th century. […] These new translations first appear in the manuscripts copied by John Abramius”.103 In the following paragraph, I shall briefly address the arguments for and against Pingree’s reconstruction; I shall limit myself to some considerations concerning the first two steps104 and take into account the evidence provided by V.

  • 105 Pingree 1989, p. 237; Pingree 1997, p. 64-78.
  • 106 On Theophilus, see Pingree 2001, p. 13-17 and Hoyland 2011, p. 4-7, and Heilen 2015, p. 928-929. On (...)
  • 107 Pingree 1989, p. 239.
  • 108 CCAG, II, p. 181-186: 181-182. The text is published on the basis of MS Venezia, BNM, Marc. gr. Z. (...)
  • 109 de Boor 1883, p. 467-468, see also Magdalino 2006, p. 55.
  • 110 On the identification of Constantinople and the discussion of the 5° deviation, see Tihon 1993, p.  (...)
  • 111 CCAG, II, p. 182 l. 2.
  • 112 Pingree 1997, p. 64, 68, and Pingree 2001, p. 12.
  • 113 A thorough study of the manuscript transmission of Theophilus’ works is in progress, for now see Pi (...)

29In Pingree’s account, one astrologer is credited with establishing “astronomy and astrology” in Constantinople at the end of the 8th century:105 Theophilus of Edessa via Stephanus the Philosopher.106 The two key pieces of evidence for this “unique event” are:107 the account found in the treatise De arte mathematica (henceforth De ar. math.) ascribed to Stephanus (by part of its manuscript tradition) and regarded as authentic;108 the influence of Theophilus’s works on Pancratius, a late-8th century astrologer, argued on the basis of an anecdotal reference by Theophanes Confessor.109 On the basis of De ar. math., which Pingree himself dated circa 780, Stephanus is credited with the restoration of “the mathematical science” in Constantinople in the late 8th century. This was achieved by recomputing some of Ptolemy’s tables for the longitude and latitude of Constantinople (placed “in the middle of the 5th klima”), in order to correct a discrepancy of 5° in the position of the Sun between observation and what one gets computing with Ptolemy’s tables.110 Pingree also credited Stephanus with bringing manuscripts and books to Constantinople (ἐκ Περσίας τῇ εὐδαίμονι ταύτῃ πόλει),111 including “probably the forebear of the common ancestor” of L and W,112 which contained the bulk of the Greek treatises by Theophilus.113 All in all, the knowledge of Theophilus’ works in late 8th century-Constantinople rests on the basis of one (implicit) reference in Theophanes Confessor.

  • 114 Tihon 1993, p. 183-190. In addition to the evidence adduced by Tihon, recall that the name of the a (...)
  • 115 Tihon links this feature with the diffusion of the Byzantine adaptation of Ibn al‐ʾAʿlam’s tables, (...)
  • 116 Jones 1987, p. 32-35.
  • 117 CCAG, II, p. 182 l. 19.
  • 118 Magdalino 2003, p. 19, Caudano 2012, p. 53, Caudano 2021, p. 40-44, and Glynias 2022, p. 194.

30Problems with the account just outlined are as follows. De ar. math. has to be included in the large number of works falsely attributed to Stephanus.114 The 5° discrepancy in the position of the Sun did not occur before the 11th century.115 Constantinople is placed in the middle of the 5th klima not before a Arabo-Byzantine manual dating circa 1072.116 A later date is also perfectly in line with is the reference to the νεώτεροι,117 that was commonly used in the 11th-12th century with reference to the astronomers of the Caliphate who provided new observations and astronomical tables, and never attested before.118

  • 119 Additional considerations should be made about the significance of the influx of Arabic astrology i (...)
  • 120 CCAG, XI.1, p. 206 [l. 15-16]: ἐν Διδύμοις μετὰ τῆς τῶν καλοποιῶν μαρτυρίας ἄπρακτον ἀναχώρησιν τῶν (...)

31The influence of Theophilus’ writings at the end of the 8th century rests on a conjecture made by Pingree on the grounds of the sole evidence of Theophanes’ account of Constantine VI’s defeat against the Bulgars at Marcellae on July 20th, 792.119 This evidence consists in Theophanes’ mention of the prediction of victory by Pancratius, false prophet and astrologer, and in the correlation between a technique described by Theophilus (De in. bell., 20)120 and the position of the Moon computed for the day of the battle. Pingree asserted that the technique used by Pancratius is the same as a technique described by Theophilus in his treatise, and that, consequently, Theophilus’ writings were read in Constantinople already in the late 8th century.

  • 121 Sophoulis 2012, p. 167-169, and Petersen 2013, p. 571.

32The correlation between the two techniques is not only based on Pingree’s conjecture, but Theophanes’ reference to Pancratius’ prediction is vague, as it does not specify whether a horoscope was cast, or what kind of horoscope it might have been, and cannot be used as evidence. Furthermore, Theophilus’ chapter applies to besieged cities, not to battles in open fields, such as the Battle of Marcellae,121 which involved only one or two fortifications. Additionally, the Moon’s position in a sign, by itself, is neither indicative of a horoscope nor representative of a specific technique. Conjectures aside, a sure terminus ante quem for the diffusion of Theophilus’ works in Constantinople is provided by the reworked recension of Theoph., Apotel., 18 preserved in W, and can be set to 930/1.

  • 122 Pingree 1968, p. viii n. 3: fols. 74r-76v, 77r-78r, 80v-81r, 82v-84r, 94r-94v, 129r.
  • 123 It also occurs in MS Venezia, BNM, Marc. gr. Z. 324 (coll. 640) [diktyon 69795], and is edited in P (...)
  • 124 Given the arrangement and variety of these horoscopic chapters (which include nativities, inception (...)
  • 125 Once attributed to Eleutherius Eleus Zebelenus, it is neither by Eleutherius of Elis (fl. 1388) nor (...)
  • 126 Pingree 1968, p. 124-132.

33Pingree takes it for granted that the bulk of the translations of astrological treatises from Arabic into Byzantine Greek (ʾAbū Maʿšar, Māšāʾallāh, al-Qabīṣī, etc.) was carried out around year 1000. In particular, he dated to circa 1015 the translation of ʾAbū Maʿšar’s Book of judgments of the revolutions of the years of nativities (Kitāb fī taḥāwīl sinī ’l-mawālīd, henceforth De rev. nat.) on the basis of two pieces of evidence: references in dated materials (ca 984-1011) carried by MS Paris, BnF, grec 2506 [diktyon 52138];122 a reference in an anonymous chapter dated to 1079 and contained in A, fol. 226r.123 On closer scrutiny, none of these texts can be used as evidence for dating the Byzantine translation around the year 1000. The first piece evidence just consists of allusions so vague that they could not prove anything;124 the second is found in an anonymous treatise125 that refers to the ancient procedure of “primary directions”. This procedure is explained in more detail in ʾAbū Maʿšar’s De rev. nat., III.1,126 but the anonymous chapter does not quote ʾAbū Maʿšar verbatim nor does it make use of any of ʾAbū Maʿšar’s refinements.

  • 127 Farina 2022b, p. 241 (with bibliography).
  • 128 Pingree 1997, p. 73-74.
  • 129 On the circulation of astrological florilegia dating to the reign of Manuel I, see Caudano 2012, in (...)

34The first explicit mention of ʾAbū Maʿšar’s treatise is found in V, fols. 31r-v, and is included in the introduction to two anonymous lists of stars derived by the Mumtaḥan Zīǧ by Yaḥyā b. ʾAbī Manṣūr, dated to 1161.127 However, as already noted by Pingree himself, the translation style of De rev. nat. is so close to the style of Dial. astr. that they are likely to be ascribed to the same translator or to be located within the same translation school.128 As said above, Dial. astr. was translated before 1092/3. Therefore, given the correlated evidence between the Arabo-Byzantine material within W (especially in W2) and Dial. astr., and between De rev. nat. and Dial. astr., it is possible to locate the translation from Arabic into Byzantine Greek of both ʾAbū Maʿšar’s treatises and Ar. chh. before 1092/3 (and certainly not around 1000), with a wider circulation attested by the 1160s.129

Section 3: The anonymous Arabo-Byzantine astrological chapters

  • 130 In my set-out below, the text is put in parallel with the Arabic original, taken from the edition B (...)
  • 131 See supra, Section 1, n. 97.
  • 132 On conjunctions, see at least Heilen 2020.
  • 133 Details are as follows. Ch. 42 considers the positions of the Sun, the Moon, Mercury, and Venus. Ch (...)
  • 134 See Yano 1997, II.8. On klimata, see also Honigmann 1929.

35The following section contains the Greek text and an English translation of Ar. chh., together with the excerpts of the Intr. astr. by al-Qabīṣī130 and the one attributed to Dorotheus.131 It is a sequence of 15, mostly anonymous, chapters, numbered from 41 to 51 (four chapters are unnumbered). The collection opens with the Byzantine translation of Intr. astr., IV.2 (ch. 41), which explains the meaning of some astrological technical terms (conjunctions and Ascendant of the conjunction).132 Notably, the description of the fifth and of the sixth conjunction is omitted. This chapter is followed by several chapters of general astrology. They deal with the influence of celestial bodies (mainly related to the theory of conjunctions and revolution of the years), in particular on the economic status of the inquirer. These are procedural chapters about the astral influence on the availability and shortage of material goods and money, each chapter focusing on a single case (ch. 42-43, 46-52).133 Related subjects are treated in a short chapter on debts (ch. 44), and in one about what goods and klimata are indicated by the Lord of the Ascendant (ch. 45).134

  • 135 Some letters have been restored thanks to an autoptic analysis of the manuscript.

36Due to the poor condition of the final folios of the manuscript, a number of restitutions were necessary. Restitutions of letters and words due to material damages are enclosed within square brackets;135 lacunas that could not be supplied with certainty have not been supplied and have been indicated as […], blank spaces left by the copyist are indicated as [***] and recorded in the apparatus. Expunctions in the Greek text are between braces, essential integrations to the Greek text are enclosed within angle brackets, those in the English translation are within round brackets.

  • 136 In keeping with the copyist’s consistent style, I retained the grave accent of oxytone words before (...)
  • 137 Noret 2014, p. 130-133. I adhere to the copyist’s practice in preserving the orthotonic form ἐστί(ν (...)
  • 138 Noret 1995. As the clause structure of these texts is highly formulaic, I have tacitly normalised p (...)
  • 139 The English translation follows the facing Greek text. The ordinals are written as full words only (...)
  • 140 See infra, ch. 42, 48, and 51.

37As the chapters are witnessed by one manuscript only, they are edited as they stand. Accordingly, I followed the manuscript in the presence of movable ny and sigma, accents136 (enclitics and proclitics included),137 and punctuation.138 The only exception is the transcription of numerals: I have transcribed the cardinals as full words even if they are not written in extenso by the copyist; the ordinals (when not written as full words in W) with a termination at the exponent of the numeral letter.139 I have corrected copying mistakes in the apparatus using the formula “lege xyz”; what is found in the manuscript is kept in the main text. Mistakes that could be ascribed either to the original translator from Arabic or to the scribe of W’s antigraph are tentatively corrected in the apparatus using the formula “fortasse legendum xyz”.140

  • 141 Lightfoot 2023, p. xii.
  • 142 Useful tools are the indexes and explanations in Bouché-Leclerq 1899, Neugebauer 1960, Neugebauer – (...)
  • 143 Heilen 2010a, p. 300. I have frequently “translated” liminal καί with punctuation. Some technical t (...)

38As recently stressed,141 astrological material in Greek language is still greatly unfamiliar to modern scholars, and a dictionary of astrological technical terms is badly needed.142 The English translation below is intended to meet the requirements of an inhomogeneous readerships with very different profiles:143 for this reason I added brief notes to particular words and not extensive commentaries.

Sigla
Codex

W

Vind. phil. gr. 115, fols. 161v, 219r-226v

Wmg

varia lectio in margine scripta (ab eodem librario)

Wsl

varia lectio vel correctio supra lineam scripta (ab eodem librario)

W1

corrector

Editores

Kr

CCAG, VI, p. 81 (Kroll 1903 ed.)

Pi1

Pingree 1976, p. 374

Pi2

Pingree 2004, p. 371-374

  • 144 Greek transliteration of al-Qabīṣī (d. 967).
  • 145 Literally, “Saracen”. For the common use of the term Σαρακηνικός as “Arab”, see Christides 1969, Ch (...)
  • 146 The last folio of the table of contents is missing.

|161v 41. On conjunctions, according to what Kapisēs144 says in the 4th book.

|161v μα Περὶ τῶν συνόδων καθὼς λέγει ὁ Καπίσης ἐν τῷ δ βιβλίῳ.

42. On abundance and shortage of goods. These procedures were translated from an Arabic145 book.

μβ Περὶ εὐθηνίας εἰδῶν καὶ κνιπείας ἀπὸ Σαρακηνῶν βιβλίου μέθοδοι αὗται μετεγράφησαν.146

  • 147 Ἀστρονομίαν εἰσαγωγῆς refers to the Arabic title Kitāb al-mudḫal ʾilā ʿilm al-nuǧūm. In both Greek (...)
  • 148 μα] Wmg.
  • 149 ἀγρονομίαν] lege ἀστρονομίαν (quod tacite restituit Pi1).
  • 150 For a discussion of the meanings of the term ὡροσκόπος, see Greenbaum – Ross 2010, p. 146-148. ὡροσ (...)

|219r 41. In the 4th book of his Introduction to the science of the stars,147 about conjunctions Kapisēs says this: the 1st is the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter, the one that shows the overall cosmic revolution, such as the renewal of faiths, of kings and of matters of general interest—it happens at the beginning of Aries. This happens every 960 years, which is called “great conjunction”.

|219r μα148 Λέγει ὁ Καπίσης ἐν τῷ δ βιβλίῳ τῆς πρὸς τὴν ἀγρονομίαν149 εἰσαγωγῆς αὐτοῦ, περὶ τῶν συνόδων τόδε· ὅτι ἡ αη σύνοδος τοῦ Κρόνου καὶ Διὸς ἡ δηλοῦσα τὴν κοσμικὴν καθόλου ἐξάλλαξιν οἷον πίστεων βασιλέων καὶ καθολικῶν πραγμάτων ἀνακαινισμὸν γίνεται ἐν τῇ ἀρχῇ τοῦ Κριοῦ. τοῦτο δὲ γίνεται κατὰ χρόνους ϡξ ἥτις ὀνομάζεται μεγάλη σύνοδος.

فأول ذلك القران والأمور الدالّة على التغيرات في هذا العالم من القرانات وغيرها ستّة أعظمها اقتران زحل والمشتري في أوّل الحمل وذلك يكون في كلّ تسعمائة وستّين سنة

The second is the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter in each one of the triplicities. This happens every 240 years. For they conjoin four times in each one of the triplicities and then they move from one triplicity to another triplicity.

Ἡ δὲ δευτέρα σύνοδος τοῦ Κρόνου καὶ Διὸς, εἰς ἓν ἕκαστον τῶν τριγώνων. γίνεται δὲ αὕτη κατὰ χρόνους σμ. τετράκις γὰρ εἰς ἓν ἕκαστον τῶν τριγώνων ἐπανακυκλοῦσι καὶ τότε μεταλλάσσονται ἀπὸ τριγώνου εἰς ἕτερον τρίγωνον.

والثاني اقترانهما في أوّل كلّ مثلثة وذلك في كلّ مائتين وأربعين سنة وهما يقترنان في كلّ مثلّثة اثني عشر قرانا ثم ينتقل اقترانهما إلى المثلثة الأخرى التي تليها

The third is the conjunction of Saturn and Mars at the beginning of Cancer. And this happens every 30 years.

Τρίτη δὲ σύνοδος τοῦ Κρόνου καὶ τοῦ Ἄρεως εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ Καρκίνου. καὶ τοῦτο κατὰ λ χρόνους γίνεται.

والثالث اقتران زحل والمريخ في أول السرطان وذلك في كلّ ثلثين سنة

The fourth is the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter, in each sign of the triplicities, every 20 years. One must know that, when you hear “Ascendant150 of the conjunction”, understand this. If a sign is found in the Ascendant when the Sun enters the first minute of Aries at the same time as the conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter happens, that is called “Ascendant of the conjunction”.

Τετάρτη δὲ σύνοδος γίνεται τοῦ Κρόνου καὶ τοῦ Διὸς, εἰς ἕκαστον ζῴδιον τῶν τριγώνων κατὰ κ χρόνους. χρὴ δὲ εἰδέναι ὅτι ὅταν ἀκούῃς ὡροσκόπον συνόδου τοῦτο νόει· ἐκεῖνο λέγεται ὡροσκόπος τῆς συνόδου, εἴ τι εὑρεθῇ ζῴδιον ὡροσκοποῦν ὅταν εἰσέλθῃ ὁ ἥλιος εἰς τὸ πρῶτον λεπτὸν τοῦ Κριοῦ κατὰ τὸν χρόνον [ἐκ]εῖνον καθ’ ὃν γίνεται ἡ σύνοδος τοῦ Κρόνου καὶ Διός.

والرابع اقتران زحل والمشتري في برج برج وذلك في كلّ عشرين سنة والخامس نزول النير الأعظم نقطة الاعتدال الربيعي وذلك في كلّ سنة شمسية والسادس اقتران النيرين أو تقابلهما وذلك في كلّ نصف شهر قمري وإذا قيل طالع القرآن فإنما يراد به الطالع عند دخول الشمس نقطة الاعتدال الربيعي في أوّل السنة التي يكون فيها القران

  • 151 μβ] Wmg.
  • 152 Literally, “coin”.
  • 153  Following the previous claim that explicitly states that goods and money are antagonistic, it is t (...)
  • 154 Literally, χρυσάφιον stands for a small gold object; in the translation, it is likened to χρυσός, a (...)
  • 155 These are the impressions of images and letters on coins, see infra, ch. 51. The word γράμμα relate (...)
  • 156 “Rising, ἀνατολικοί” and “setting, δυτικοί” have to be intended as “visible due to their distance f (...)
  • 157 From Latin dignitas, it expresses a condition of prestige which can be intended as relationship and (...)
  • 158 εὐθηνεῖται] fortasse legendum κνιπεύει.
  • 159 ὁ] suppl. : om. W.
  • 160 εἰς] suppl. : om. W.
  • 161 κνιπεύῃ] lege κνιπεύει.
  • 162 ὑψοῦται] lege ὑψοῦνται.
  • 163 τοῖς] suppl. : om. W.
  • 164 ταπείνωμα] lege ταπεινώμασιν.
  • 165 μγ] Wmg.
  • 166 “Likewise” is likely to be supplied, see infra, n. 167.
  • 167 ο] fortasse legendum ὁμοίως
  • 168 μδ] Wmg.
  • 169 ὄρθια] lege ὀρθὰ.
  • 170 με] Wmg.
  • 171 θέλεις] lege θέλῃς.
  • 172 εἰς τὰ μέρη] suppl. : om. W.
  • 173 μϛ] Wmg.
  • 174 Vacuum reliquit W] ἐναλλαγῆς restituendum.
  • 175 εἰς] suppl. : vacuum reliquit W.
  • 176 εἰς] suppl. : om. W.
  • 177 γου] τρίτου KrPi1.
  • 178 μζ] Wmg.
  • 179 Literally, “under the beams”.
  • 180 πλήρης] lege πλήρη (corr. KrPi1).
  • 181 κυριεύουσι] κυριεύουσιν Pi1.
  • 182 κνιπείαν] κνιπεύειν KrPi1.
  • 183 μη] Wmg.
  • 184 ʾAbū Isḥāq Muḥammad b. Hārūn al-Rašīd, known as al-Muʿtaṣim (r. 833-842), is the eighth ʿAbbāsid Ca (...)
  • 185 It probably refers to the flood of Baghdad that occurred in 835, see Karaǧī 1940, p. 11.
  • 186 αὐτῆς] lege αὐτοῦ.
  • 187 κνιπείαν] fortasse legendum εὐθηνίαν.
  • 188 μὴ] lege μὲν.
  • 189 μθ] Wmg.
  • 190 That means retrograding. The verb ὀρθοποδίζω is usually rendered with terms close to ἀναποδίζω/ἀναπ (...)
  • 191 That is, the two equinoxes and the two solstices.
  • 192 ν] Wmg.
  • 193 It translates the Arabic dinār, see supra, Section 2.
  • 194 The Greek χάρτης/χαρτίον generally means a sheet or roll of papyrus (see LSJ 116441-116443) that is (...)
  • 195 αὐτὸν] lege αὐτοὺς.
  • 196 να] Wmg.
  • 197 It translates the Arabic ʿanbar.
  • 198 φασωλίου] lege φασουλίου.
  • 199 κνιπείας] lege κνιπείαν.
  • 200 ἐν τῷ Κριῷ] εἰς πυρῶδες W1sl.
  • 201 ὑδαργύρου] lege ὑδραργύρου.
  • 202 ἀερώδη] suppl. W1.
  • 203 καὶ πασῶν] καὶ πασῶν ὁ suppl. W1.
  • 204 ὑδατώδη δηλοῖ λεῖψιν] τώδη δηλοῖ λ (sic) suppl. W1.
  • 205 εἰ δὲ ὁ] suppl. W1.
  • 206 ζῴδιον] suppl. W1.
  • 207 εἰς γεῶδες ζῴδιον] suppl. : εἰς γαιώ suppl. W1.
  • 208 δηλοῖ λεῖψιν τ] suppl. W1.
  • 209 καὶ] suppl. : om. W.
  • 210 κονδύλων] lege κονδυλίων.
  • 211 χρόνου] ἕως ᾧδας (sic) W1mg.
  • 212 τόποις] ἀπῶδε (sic) Wmg.
  • 213 κνιπείαν] fortasse legendum εὐθηνίαν.
  • 214 ὑπὸ γῆν] ὑπογῆν W.
  • 215 Vacuum reliquit W.
  • 216 κρίνῃς] lege κρῖνε.
  • 217 This happens when one of the five planets begins or stops retrograding.
  • 218 τρόπον] lege τόπον.
  • 219 That is, March 14th, 1111.
  • 220 Generally, the term περίπατος indicates the motion of the planets along the zodiac (ecliptic circle (...)
  • 221 νυκτὸς] suppl. Pi2.
  • 222 τὸ αον] suppl. Pi2.
  • 223 Κωνσταντινουπόλει] Κω⟨ν⟩σταντίνου πόλει Pi2.
  • 224 ὅριος] lege ὁρίοις.
  • 225 ὅριος] lege ὁρίοις.
  • 226 Κρόνου] suppl. Pi2.
  • 227 On fol. 227r only bits of words and of a thema, dated to the month of May, are readable.
  • 228 τῶν] lege τῆς.
  • 229 -σὶ] suppl. Pi2.
  • 230 -ν Ἰχθύων] suppl. Pi2.
  • 231 -δ ὥρας] suppl. Pi2.
  • 232 -σα] suppl. Pi2.
  • 233 ἦν] ἐστι Pi2.
  • 234 λεπτὰ] suppl. Pi2.
  • 235 ἀπὸ] suppl. Pi2.
  • 236 τῆς νυκτὸς] γ´ λεπτὰ (?) ⟨κ⟩ suppl. Pi2.

42. On abundance and shortage of goods. These procedures were translated from an Arabic book.

μβ151 Περὶ εὐθηνίας εἰδῶν καὶ κνιπείας ἀπὸ Σαρακηνικοῦ βιβλίου μέθοδοι αὗται μετεγράφησαν.

Look at the Moon, the Sun, Mercury, and Venus. The Sun because it is responsible for the Moon, as its waxing and waning happen in new moons and full moons. Mercury and |219v Venus because their sphere approaches the lunar sphere, and as goods and money152 are opposite to each other. When goods are exalted, money is abundant,153 when money is scarce, goods are abundant. I call “goods” and “money” the following things: gold and silver, food, clothes, and beverages. The indicators of money are the kentra. Therefore, when the benefics are found in the kentra, money is scarce and goods are abundant. The loci indicating goods are the apoklimata of the four kentra, and their epanaphorai. If the benefics are found in those loci, (there is) shortage of goods and abundance of money; if the malefics, the opposite. When you find the benefics in the kentra and in the apoklimata, keep the stronger of these. If the benefic is retrograde and in its dejection, then it has no power; likewise the malefic, when it is found in its dejection as well. Then, it is possible to observe what follows: when you locate the Ascendant of the year or of four months or of one month or of half a month—that is, full moon—then look at the Moon, and if you find it standing below a benefic, say shortage of goods; if (below) a malefic, abundance. Likewise, also the Moon: if it is found in a kentron, it indicates shortage of goods, and even more if it is in its own exaltation and unharmed. Then look at |220r the Sun, and if it is in aspect with a benefic or in conjunction with a benefic—such as Venus and Jupiter— understand shortage of money, and especially if it is in a kentron or in its exaltation. If it is together with malefics, say abundance of money, and also when it is in an apoklima or in its dejection. Venus and Mercury are associated with silver and gold coin:154 Venus with beauty and brightness, Mercury with impression and letters.155 However, Mercury is preferred in gold because of the proximity to the Sun, and when it is in exaltation, money is scarce; when it is in dejection, it is abundant, and even more when both of them are in exaltation. When Mercury is together with the Sun, gold is preferred and cherished by kings, and goods are abundant. When Venus is together with the Sun, silver is preferred and cherished by kings. When they are not together with the Sun—that is, Mercury and Venus—but are in their apogees, they produce shortage of money, and even more if they are rising156 and in their own exaltations or in their houses or if they have dignity.157 When they are found in their perigees, and are also setting or in hostile houses or in their dejections, they indicate abundance of money and shortage of goods. When you locate the Ascendant of the year or of four months or of the new moon and full moon, look at the second locus and at its Lord. If you find the Lord of the second in the kentra, and even more if it has dignity and is a benefic, it indicates shortage of money. If it is a malefic and it is found in the kentra, look at how it happens to be: if it is benefitted, it indicates shortage |220v of money. It is not destined for it if it is a malefic, for it is benefitted, and it indicates that money is dragged around to the hands of worthless men, according to what has been written before—namely, that the apoklimata and the epanaphorai are indicators of goods. If benefics are found there, they are scarce; if malefics, they are abundant. If you find both of them—that is, benefics and malefics— say shortage of the goods indicated by the signs in which the benefics are, abundance in those in which the malefics are, because each sign dominates its own goods, like Aries (dominates) sheep.

Βλέπε τὴν Σελήνην καὶ τὸν Ἥλιον, καὶ τὸν Ἑρμῆν καὶ τὴν Ἀφροδίτην· τὸν μὲν Ἥλιον διότι αὐτὸς ἐστὶν αἴτιος τῆς Σελήνης τῆς τε αὐξήσεως αὐτῆς καὶ μειώσεως γινομένων ἐν ταῖς συνόδοις καὶ πανσελήνοις· τὸν δὲ Ἑρμῆν καὶ |219v τὴν Ἀφροδίτην διὰ τὸ ἐγγίζειν τὰς σφαίρας τούτων τῇ σεληνιακῇ σφαίρᾳ, καὶ ἐπεὶ εἰσὶ τὰ πράγματα καὶ ἡ χαραγὴ ἐναντία ἀλλήλοις. ὅτ’ ὑψοῦνται τὰ πράγματα, εὐθηνεῖται158 ἡ χαραγή· ὅταν δ’ ἡ χαραγὴ κνιπεύῃ, εὐθηνοῦσι τὰ πράγματα. πράγματα δὲ καὶ χαραγὴν ἐκεῖνα λέγω· χρυσὸν καὶ ἄσημον, βρώματα καὶ ἐνδύματα καὶ πόματα. καὶ τὰ μ[ὲν] δηλοῦντα περὶ χαραγῆς εἰσὶ τὰ κέντρα· ὅταν οὖν εὑρεθ[ῶσιν] εἰς τὰ κέντρα ἀγαθοποιοὶ, κνιπεύει ἡ χαραγὴ καὶ εὐθηνοῦ[σι] τὰ πράγματα. οἱ δὲ δηλοῦντες τόποι περὶ τῶν πραγμάτων εἰσ[ὶ] τά τε ἀποκλίματα τῶν τεσσάρων κέντρων, καὶ αἱ ἐπαναφοραὶ το[ύτων]. καὶ εἰ μὲν εὑρεθῶσιν ἐν τούτοις τοῖς τόποις ἀγαθοποιοὶ, [τ]ὴ[ν] κνιπείαν τῶν πραγμάτων καὶ εὐθηνίαν τῆς χαραγῆς. εἰ δὲ οἱ κ[α]κοποιοὶ, τὸ ἐναντίον. καὶ ὅταν εὕρῃς τοὺς ἀγαθοποιοὺς εἰς τὰ κέντρα καὶ εἰς τὰ ἀποκλίματα, κράτει τὸν ἐνδυναμώτερον τούτων· καὶ εἰ μὲν ὁ ἀγαθοποιὸς ἐστὶν ὑποποδισμένος καὶ εἰς ταπείν[ω]μ[α] αὐτοῦ, τότε δύναμιν οὐκ ἔχει· ὁμοίως καὶ ὁ κακοπο[ιὸς] ὅταν εὑρεθῇ εἰς ταπεί[ν]ωμα αὐτοῦ. τότε δὲ ἐνδέχεται σκοπεῖν ταῦτα· ὅταν ποιήσῃς ὡροσκόπον τοῦ χρόνο[υ ἢ] τοῦ τετραμήνου ἢ τοῦ μηνὸς ἢ τοῦ ἡμίσεος μηνὸς τουτέστι τῆς πανσελήνου, βλέπε δὲ τότε τὴν σελήνην καὶ εἰ μὲν εὕρῃς αὐτὴν ὑ[φισ]τῶσαν ἀγαθοποιὸν, λέγε κνιπείαν πραγμάτων· εἰ δὲ κακοποιὸν, εὐθηνίαν. ὁ[μοίως] καὶ ἡ σελήνη εἰ εὑρεθῇ ἐν κέντρῳ, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν πραγμάτων καὶ μᾶλλο[ν] εἰ ἔστιν ἐν ἰδίῳ αὐτῆς ὑψώματι καὶ ἀκάκωτος. βλέπε δὲ τ[ότε] |220r τὸν Ἥλιον, καὶ εἰ μὲν ἀγαθοποιὸν ἐφορᾷ ἢ ἀγαθοποιῷ συνοδεύῃ οἷον Ἀφροδίτῃ καὶ Διῒ, νόει κνιπείαν χαραγῆς καὶ μάλιστα εἰ εὑρεθῇ ἐν κέντρῳ ἢ ἐν ὑψώματι αὐτοῦ· εἰ δὲ ἔστι μετὰ κακοποιῶν, λέγε εὐθηνίαν χαραγῆς, καὶ ὅταν ἔστιν ἐν ἀποκλίματι ἢ ἐν ταπεινώματι αὐτοῦ. μετέχει δὲ ἡ Ἀφροδίτη καὶ ⟨ὁ⟩159 Ἑρμῆς εἰς τὴν χαραγὴν τοῦ ἀσήμου καὶ χρυσαφίου· ἡ μὲν Ἀφροδίτη, εἰς τὸ κάλλος καὶ τὴν λαμπροτάτην· ὁ δὲ Ἑρμῆς, ⟨εἰς⟩160 τὴν χαραγὴν καὶ τὰ γράμματα. ἀλλ’ ὁ Ἑρμῆς προτιμᾶται ἐν τῷ χρυσῷ διὰ τὴν πρὸς τὸν Ἥλιον ἐγγύτητα, καὶ ὅταν οὗτος ὑψοῦται, κνιπεύῃ161 ἡ χαραγή· ὅταν δὲ ταπεινοῦται, εὐθήνει καὶ μᾶλλον ὅταν ὑψοῦται162 ἀμφότεροι. ὅταν δὲ ἔστιν ὁ Ἑρμῆς μετὰ τοῦ Ἡλίου, τιμᾶται ὁ χρυσὸς καὶ ἀγαπᾶται παρὰ τοῖς βασιλεῦσι καὶ εὐθηνοῦνται τὰ πράγματα. καὶ ὅταν ἔστιν ἡ Ἀφροδίτη μετὰ τοῦ Ἡλίου, τιμᾶται ὁ ἄσημος καὶ ἀγαπᾶται παρὰ ⟨τοῖς⟩163 βασιλεῦσι. καὶ ὅταν οὐκ εἰσὶ μετὰ τοῦ Ἡλίου τουτέστιν ὁ Ἑρμῆς καὶ ἡ Ἀφροδίτη, ἀλλ’ εὑρεθῶσιν ἐν τοῖς ἀπογείοις αὐτῶν, ποιοῦσι κνιπείαν χαραγῆς καὶ μᾶλλον εἰ εἰσὶν ἀνατολικοὶ καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἰδίοις αὐτῶν ὑψώμασιν ἢ ἐν τοῖς οἴκοις αὐτῶν ἢ ἔχουσι λόγον. ὅταν δὲ ἐν τοῖς ὑπογείοις αὐτῶν εὑρεθῶσι, καὶ εἰσὶ καὶ δυτικοὶ ἢ ἐν ἀλλοτρίοις οἴκοις ἢ ἐν ταπείνωμα164 αὐτῶν, δηλοῦσιν εὐθηνίαν χαραγῆς καὶ κνιπείαν πραγμάτων. καὶ ὅταν ποιῇς ὡροσκόπον τοῦ χρόνου ἢ τοῦ τετραμήνου ἢ τῆς συνόδου καὶ πανσελήνου, βλέπε τὸν δεύτερον τόπον καὶ τὸν κύριον αὐτοῦ· καὶ εἰ μὲν εὕρῃς τὸν κύριον τοῦ δευτέρου εἰς τὰ κέντρα καὶ μᾶλλον εἰ ἔχει λόγον καὶ ἔστιν ἀγαθοποιὸς, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν χαραγῆς· εἰ δὲ ἔστι κακοποιὸν καὶ εὑρεθῇ εἰς κέντρα, βλέπε πῶς ὑπάρχει· εἰ μὲν ἀγαθύνεται, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν |220v χαραγῆς. καὶ οὐ μέλλει αὐτῷ εἰ ἔστι κακοποιὸς διότι ἀγαθύνεται, καὶ δηλοῖ τὴν χαραγὴν περισύρεσθαι εἰς χεῖρας ἀνθρώπων οὐδαμινῶν, καθὼς δὲ προγέγραπται· ὅτι τὰ ἀποκλίματα καὶ αἱ ἐπαναφοραὶ εἰσὶ δηλωτικὰ τῶν πραγμάτων. εἰ μὲν εὑρεθῶσιν ἐκεῖ ἀγαθοποιοὶ, κνιπεύουσιν· εἰ δὲ κακοποιοὶ, εὐθηνοῦσιν· εἰ δὲ ἀμφοτέρους εὕρῃς τουτέστιν ἀγαθοποιοὺς καὶ κακοποιοὺς, λέγε κνιπεί[αν] πραγμάτων ὧν δηλοῦσι τὰ ζῴδια ἐν οἷς εἰσὶν οἱ ἀγαθοποιοὶ, εὐθηνίαν ἐν οἷς εἰσὶν οἱ κακοποιοὶ, διότι πᾶν ζῴδιον κυριεύει οἰκ[είων] εἰδῶν, οἷον ὁ Κριὸς τῶν προβάτων.

43. Another.

μγ Ἄλλο.165

When the Lord of the Ascendant is in the Ascendant or in one of the kentra and under the earth, increasing, it indicates an increase in goods for that year; if it is decreasing, it indicates a decrease in goods; if (it is) in its cycle and the motion is uniform, it indicates stability of goods; when it is found in the epanaphorai—namely, the second and the eighth locus—it indicates decreases and increases of goods. If the Moon is found in the same loci, it indicates the same, but with a diminution of hostility, compared to the Lord of the Ascendant. Likewise, if the Lord of the 7th is found in the same loci, it indicates the same, but something less compared to the Lord of the Ascendant. Likewise, also the Lord of Midheaven and of the 4th indicate the same, but less than these three […]166 they indicate abundance and shortage in the loci and klimata where their kentra dominate. If the Lord of the Ascendant is indicator, it indicates that the outcome is in the first quarter of the year; if the Lord of Midheaven, in the second (quarter); |221r if the Lord of the 7th, in the third quarter; if the Lord of the fourth, in the fourth quarter. If both kentra of the four turn out to be found as indicators, it indicates the whole year.

Ὅτ[αν] ἔνι ὁ κύριος τοῦ ὡροσκόπου εἰς τὸν ὡροσκόπον ἢ εἰς ἕνα τῶν κέντρων καὶ ὑπ[ὸ γῆν] αὐξήψηφος, δηλοῖ κατὰ τὸν χρόνον ἐκεῖνον αὔξησ[ιν τῶν] πραγμάτων· εἰ δὲ ἔνι λειψίψηφος, δηλοῖ λεῖψιν πραγμάτων· εἰ δὲ ἐν [τῷ] κύκλῳ αὐτοῦ καὶ ὁ δρόμος ἰσοταχὴς, δηλοῖ στάσιν τῶν πραγμάτων· καὶ ὅταν εὑρεθῇ ἐν ταῖς ἐπαναφοραῖς ἤγουν τῷ δευτέρῳ τόπῳ καὶ τῷ ὀγδόῳ, δη[λοῖ] λείψεις τῶν πραγμάτων καὶ αὐξήσεις. εἰ δὲ εὑρεθῇ ἡ σελήνη ἐν τοῖς αὐ[τοῖς] τόποις, δηλοῖ τὸ ὅμοιον, πλὴν ἐλάττωσιν τινὰ ἔχθ[ρας παρά τε] τὸν κύριον τοῦ ὡροσκόπου. ὁμοίως καὶ ὁ κύριος τοῦ ζου εἰ εὑρεθῇ ἐν [τοῖς αὐτοῖς] τόποις, δηλοῖ τὸ ὅμοιον, πλὴν ἔλαττόν τι παρὰ τὸν κύριον τοῦ ὡροσκόπου. ὁμοίως καὶ ὁ κύριος [τ]οῦ μεσουρανήματος καὶ τοῦ δου, δ[ηλοῦσι] τὸ ὅμοιον, πλὴν ἔλαττον τῶν τριῶν τούτων· † ο[…] †167 δηλοῦσιν περὶ εὐθηνίας καὶ κνιπείας ἐν τοῖς τόποις καὶ ἐν τοῖς κλίμα[σι] ἐν οἷς κυριεύουσι τὰ κέντρα τούτων. καὶ εἰ μὲν δηλωτικὸς ἐστὶν ὁ κύριος τοῦ ὡροσκόπου, δηλοῖ εἰς τὸ πρῶτον τεταρτημόριον τοῦ χρόνου τὸ ἀποτέλεσμα· εἰ δὲ ὁ κύριος τοῦ μεσουρανήματος, εἰς τὸ δ[εύτερον]· |221r εἰ δὲ ὁ κύριος τοῦ ζου, εἰς τὸ τρίτον τεταρτημόριον· εἰ δὲ ὁ κύριος τοῦ τετάρτου, εἰς τὸ τέταρτον τεταρτημόριον. εἰ δὲ εὕρηνται ἀμφότεροι οἱ τῶν τεσσάρων κέντροι δηλωτικοὶ, δηλοῖ τὸν χρόνον ὅλον.

44. Another.

μδ Ἄλλο.168

Look at the Moon: if it is found in the straight signs, from Cancer to Sagittarius, it produces profit for merchants; if from Capricorn to Gemini, in the oblique signs, debts.

Βλέπε τὴν σελήνην εἰ μὲν εὑρεθῇ εἰς τὰ ὄρθια169 ζῴδια ἀπὸ Καρκίνου εἰς Τοξότην, κέρδος ποιεῖ τῶν πραγματευτῶν· εἰ δὲ ἀπὸ Αἰγοκέρωτος εἰς Διδύμους εἰς τὰ πλάγια ζῴδια, ζημίας.

45. Another.

με Ἄλλο.170

Observe the Lord of the Ascendant in what sign happens to be, and if you find it in a fiery (sign), it indicates gold, silver, and all (kind of) goods produced through fire; if in an airy (sign), it indicates living beings, humans, slaves, sheep, and oxen; if in a watery (sign), fish; if in an earthy (sign), everything that grows on earth, and food. If you want to see in what locus it is, observe: if it is (in) Aries, it indicates the 1st klima in the eastern parts; if (in) Leo, likewise the eastern parts and the end of the 1st klima; if (in) Sagittarius, the eastern parts and the beginning of the second klima; if (in) Taurus, the end of the second klima; if (in) Virgo, the end of the 3rd klima; if (in) Capricorn, the beginning of the 3rd klima; if in Gemini, it indicates the beginning of the 4th klima in the western parts; if in Libra, the end of the 4th klima; if in Aquarius, it indicates the beginning of the 5th klima in the western parts; if in Cancer, the end of the 5th klima; if in Scorpio, the beginning |221v of the 6th klima; if in Pisces, it indicates the 7th  klima—the one from Capricorn—and this for three months. When the Sun enters the beginning of Cancer, likewise do as previously taught. Likewise, [when the Sun enters] the beginning of Libra and Capricorn too.

Ἴδε τὸν κύριον τοῦ ὡροσκόπου εἰς ποῖον ζῴδιον ὑπάρχει, καὶ εἰ μὲν εὕρῃς τοῦτον εἰς πυρῶδες, δηλοῖ περὶ χρυσὸν καὶ ἄργυρον καὶ πᾶν πράγμα διὰ πυρὸς γινόμενον· εἰ δὲ εἰς ἀερῶδες, δηλοῖ περὶ τὰ ζῷα καὶ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους καὶ τοὺς δούλους, καὶ τὰ πρόβατα καὶ τοὺς βόας· εἰ δὲ εἰς ὑδατῶδες, περὶ ἰχθύων· εἰ δὲ εἰς γεῶδες, περὶ πάντων τῶν ἐν τῇ γῇ φυομένων, καὶ περὶ βρωμάτων. εἰ δὲ θέλεις171 ἰδεῖν εἰς ποῖον τόπον γίνεται· ἴδε εἰ μὲν ἔστι Κριός, δηλοῖ τὸ αον κλίμα εἰς τὰ μέρη τῆς ἀνατολῆς· εἰ δὲ Λέων, ὁμοίως εἰς τὰ μέρη τῆς ἀνατολῆς καὶ εἰς τὸ ἔσχατον τοῦ αου κλίματος· εἰ δὲ Τοξότης, εἰς τὰ μέρη τῆς ἀνατολῆς καὶ εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ δευτέρου κλίματος· εἰ δὲ Ταῦρος, εἰς τὸ ἔσχατον τοῦ δευτέρου κλίματος· εἰ δὲ Παρθένος, εἰς τὸ ἔσχατον τοῦ γου κλίματος· εἰ δὲ Αἰγόκερως, εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ γου κλίματος· εἰ δὲ εἰς Διδύμους, δηλοῖ εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ δου κλίματος εἰς τὰ μέρη τῆς δύσεως· εἰ δὲ εἰς τὸν Ζυγόν, εἰς τὸ ἔσχατον τοῦ δου κλίματος· εἰ δὲ εἰς τὸν Ὑδροχόον, δηλοῖ εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ εου κλίματος ⟨εἰς τὰ μέρη⟩172 τῆς δύσεως· εἰ δὲ εἰς Καρκίνον, εἰς τὸ ἔσχατον τοῦ εου κλίματος· εἰ δὲ εἰς τὸν Σκορπίον, εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν |221v τοῦ ϛου κλίματος· εἰ δὲ εἰς τοὺς Ἰχθύας, δηλοῖ εἰς τὸ ζου κλίμα τὸ ἀπὸ Αἰγοκέρωτος καὶ τοῦτο περὶ τοῦ τριμήνου. ὅταν δὲ εἰσέρχηται ὁ Ἥλιος εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ Καρκίνου, ποίησον ὁμοίως ὡς προεδιδάχθης. ὁμοίως καὶ εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν τοῦ Ζυγοῦ καὶ τοῦ Αἰγοκέρωτος.

46. Another. Willing to investigate abundance and shortage.

μϛ173 Ἄλλο. Περὶ εὐθηνίας καὶ κνιπείας βουλόμενος σκοπῆσαι.

Look at the Ascendant of the ⟨revolution⟩ and at its Lord. If you find the Lord of the Ascendant swift in motion, it indicates abundance of food that month; if it is in Midheaven, it indicates shortage; if you find it hurrying to its exaltation, it likewise indicates shortage; if it is in aspect with another star that is found in Midheaven, it indicates the same. If you find the Lord of the Ascendant, decreasing, hurrying to its dejection, it indicates abundance; if the Lord of the Ascendant is in aspect with another planet that is in the 3rd or in the 9th (locus), it likewise indicates abundance; if it is found in the 7th or in the fourth, it produces a great stability of goods.

Βλέπε τὸν ὡροσκόπον τῆς [***]174 καὶ εἰς τὸν κύριον αὐτῆς. καὶ εἰ μὲν εὕρῃς τὸν κύριον τοῦ ὡροσκόπου ταχύδρομον, δηλοῖ πλῆθος τῶν βρωμάτων εἰς ἐκεῖνον τὸν μῆνα· εἰ δὲ εἰς τὸ μεσουράνημα ἐστὶ, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν· εἰ δὲ εὕρῃς αὐτὸν ἀπερχόμενον εἰς τὸ ὕψωμα αὐτοῦ, δηλ[οῖ] ὁμοίως κνιπείαν· εἰ δὲ σχηματίζεται ἑτέρῳ ἀστέρι εὑρισκομένῳ ἐν τῷ μεσουρανήματι, δηλοῖ ὁμοίως. εἰ δὲ εὕρῃς τὸν κύριον τοῦ ὡροσκόπου, λειψίψηφον, ἀπερχόμενον εἰς τὸ ταπείνωμα αὐτοῦ, δηλοῖ εὐθηνίαν· εἰ δὲ σχηματίζετ[αι] ὁ κύριος τοῦ ὡροσκόπου ἑτέρῳ ἀστέρι ὄντι ἐν τῷ γ ἢ τῷ θ, ὁμοίως δηλοῖ εὐθηνίαν· εἰ δὲ εὑρεθῇ εἰς τὸν ζον ἢ εἰς τὸν τέταρτον, ποιεῖ μεγάλην στάσιν τῶν πραγμάτων.

Another.

Ἄλλ[ο].

If the Ascendant of the year is in a fiery sign, it indicates shortage; likewise if the Lord of the Ascendant is also found in a fiery (sign), it burns goods and causes shortage of fruits. When it is found in an airy sign, and the Ascendant is likewise in an airy (sign), it also indicates an increase of fruits. Ιf |222r the luminaries are found under the earth at the turn of the year and are decreasing in motion, they indicate abundance of goods; if they are found above the earth, they indicate shortage, and even more if they are swift in motion and in fiery signs; likewise the Lord of the Ascendant too.

Εἰ μὲν ἔστιν ὁ ὡροσκόπος τοῦ χρόνου ⟨εἰς⟩175 πυρῶδες ζῴδιον, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν· ὁμοίως καὶ ὁ κύριος τοῦ ὡροσκόπου εἰ εὑρεθῇ εἰς πυρῶδες, διακαίει τὰ πράγματα καὶ κνιπεύει τ[ὰ] τῶν καρπῶν· ὅταν εὑρεθῇ εἰς ἀερῶδες ζῴδιον, ὁμοί[ως καὶ] ὁ ὡροσκόπος ⟨εἰς⟩176 ἀερῶδες, δηλοῖ αὔξησιν [τ]ῶν [κ]αρπ[ῶν]. εἰ δὲ |222r εὑρεθῶσι τὰ φῶτα εἰς τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τοῦ χρόνου ὑπὸ γῆν, καὶ εἰσὶ λειψίδρομοι, δηλοῖ εὐθηνίαν πραγμάτων· εἰ δὲ εὑρεθῶσιν ὑπὲρ γῆν, δηλοῦσι κνιπείαν καὶ μᾶλλον εἰ εἰσὶ ταχυδρόμοι καὶ εἰς πυρώδη ζῴδια· ὁμοίως καὶ ὁ κύριος τοῦ ὡροσκόπου.

47. From the third book of Dorotheus, 16th chapter, it is written like this:

μζ Ἀπὸ τοῦ γου177 βιβλίου τοῦ Δωροθέου εἰς τὸ ιϛον κεφάλαιον γράφεται οὕτως.178

Observe the stars that have a morning phase at the turn of the year: they cause shortage of the goods over which they dominate. The stars that are found in their dejections and are unfortunate produce abundance of the goods over which they dominate; if they are found unfortunate both in power and in inclination—that is, in their apoklimata and in their dejections—and invisible,179 then say complete abundance of the goods over which they dominate; when they are found fortunate both in power and in inclination, say the opposite—shortage; if they are found fortunate in power but misfortunate in inclination, they indicate shortage and, after that, abundance.

Ἴδε εἰς τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τοῦ χρόνου τοὺς ἀστέρας τοὺς ἔχοντας φάσιν ἑῴαν· κνιπεύουσι γὰρ τὰ εἴδη ὧνπερ κυριεύουσιν. οἱ δὲ ἀστέρες οἱ εὑρεθέντες ἐν τοῖς ταπεινώμασιν αὐτῶν καὶ κεκακωμένοι ποιοῦσιν εὐθηνίαν τῶν εἰδῶν ὧνπερ κυριεύουσιν· εἰ δὲ εὑρεθῶσι κεκακωμένοι καὶ δυνάμει καὶ οἰκειώσει τουτέστιν εἰς τὰ ἀποκλίματα καὶ εἰς τὰ ταπεινώματα αὐτῶν καὶ ὕπαυγοι, τότε λέγε πλήρης180 τῶν εἰδῶν εὐθηνίαν ὧνπερ κυριεύουσι·181 καὶ ὅταν εὑρεθῶσι καλῶς ἔχοντες καὶ δυνάμει καὶ οἰκειώσει, λέγε τὸ ἐναντίον κνιπείαν·182 εἰ δὲ εὑρεθῶσι καλῶς τῇ δυνάμει, κακῶς δὲ τῇ οἰκειώσει, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα εὐθηνίαν.

48. Another.

μη183 Ἄλλο.

When the Sun enters the 19th degree of Libra—that is, |222v its dejection— locate the Ascendant and observe the Moon. If it is found under the earth, it indicates shortage of goods; if above the earth, abundance; if between the lower culmination and the Ascendant, it indicates a moderate state; if between the lower culmination and the setting point, great shortage; if between the 7th (locus) and Midheaven, great abundance; if between Midheaven and the Ascendant, a moderate state of abundance. Note this as well: when the Moon enters Libra, it produces a shortage of every good sold by means of a balance; when it enters Libra and is increasing—that is, what is in the 3rd row is added to its epicycle—it indicates an increase in goods—that is, abundance. Observe Saturn too, when it enters the beginning of the signs: if it is decreasing, it produces a decrease in goods by the ruin of men; if increasing, it produces an increase in goods by the ruin of things, as happened in the days of Mogtesam.184 (Saturn) entered Scorpio and was increasing, and there was abundance of rains, and from them ruin.185 When Saturn enters the fiery triplicity and is increasing, it indicates harm to the growth of quadrupeds and animals; when decreasing, it diminishes and |223r kills them. When it enters the earthy triplicity and is increasing, goods are exalted to abundance; if it is decreasing, it produces harm to what grows from the earth: it burns it and destroys it. When it enters the airy triplicity, increasing, there is harm from abundance of winds; if decreasing, there is harm from absence of wind and it also afflicts men, and there are deaths. If it enters the watery triplicity and is increasing, there is harm from abundance of water; if decreasing, it is from lack of rain.

Ὅτα[ν] ὁ ἥλιος πορεύηται τῇ ιθ μοίρᾳ τοῦ Ζυγοῦ τουτέστιν |222v τὸ ταπείνωμα αὐτῆς,186 ποίησον ὡροσκόπον καὶ ἴδε τὴν Σελήνην. καὶ εἰ μὲν εὑρεθῇ ὑπὸ γῆν, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν πραγμάτων· εἰ δὲ ὑπὲρ γῆν, εὐθηνίαν· εἰ δὲ ἀναμεταξὺ τοῦ ὑπογείου καὶ τοῦ ὡροσκόπου, δηλοῖ μεσότητα· εἰ δὲ ἀναμεταξὺ τοῦ ὑπογείου καὶ τοῦ δύνοντος, κνιπείαν πολλήν· εἰ δὲ ἀναμεταξὺ τοῦ ζου καὶ τοῦ μεσουρανήματος, εὐθηνίαν πολλήν· εἰ δὲ ἀναμεταξὺ τοῦ μεσουρανήματος καὶ τοῦ ὡροσκόπου, μεσότητα εὐθηνίας. σημείωσαι δὲ καὶ τοῦτο· ὅτι ὅταν εἰσέρχηται ἡ Σελήνη εἰς τὸν Ζυγὸν, κνιπεύει πᾶν εἶδος πιπρασκόμενον διὰ ζυγοῦ· καὶ ὅταν εἰσέρχηται εἰς τὸν Ζυγὸν καὶ ἔστιν αὐξήψηφος τουτέστι τὰ διὰ τοῦ γου στίχου προστίθενται τῷ ἐπικύκλῳ αὐτοῦ, δηλοῖ αὔξησιν πραγμάτων τουτέστι κνιπείαν.187 ἴδε δὲ καὶ τὸν Κρόνον ὅταν εἰσέρχηται εἰς τὴν ἀρχὴν τῶν ζῳδίων· εἰ μὴ188 ἔστι λειψίψηφος, ποιεῖ ἐλάττωσιν τῶν πραγμάτων διὰ φθορὰν ἀνθρώπων· εἰ δὲ αὐξήψηφος, ποιεῖ αὔξησιν τῶν πραγμάτων διὰ φθορὰν πραγμάτων ὥσπερ ἐγένετο ἐπὶ τῶν ἡμερῶν τοῦ Μογτέσαμ. εἰσῆλθε εἰς τὸν Σκορπίον καὶ ἦν αὐξήψηφος, καὶ ἐγένετο πλῆθος ὑδάτων καὶ ἀπὸ τούτων φθορά. ὅταν δὲ εἰσέρχηται ὁ Κρόνος εἰς τὸ τρίγωνον τὸ πυρῶδες καὶ ἔνι αὐξήψηφος, δηλοῖ βλάβην εἰς αὔξησιν τῶν τετ[ρ]απόδων καὶ τῶν ἀλόγων· ὅταν δὲ λειψίψηφος, ἐλαττοῖ τα[ῦ]τα καὶ |223r ἀπόλλυσι. ὅταν δὲ εἰσέρχηται εἰς τὸ τρίγωνον τὸ γεῶδες καὶ ἔνι αὐξήψηφος, εὐθηνίαν ὑψοῦνται τὰ πράγματα· εἰ δὲ ἔνι λειψίψηφος, ποιεῖ βλάβην εἰς τὰ φυόμενα ἀπὸ τῆς γῆς καὶ διακαίει ταῦτα καὶ φθείρει. ὅταν δὲ εἰσέρχηται εἰς τὸ ἀερῶδες τρίγωνον αὐξήψηφος, γίνεται βλάβη ὑπὸ πλήθους ἀνέμων· εἰ δὲ λειψίψηφος, γίνεται βλάβη ὑπὸ νηνεμίας καὶ βλάπτει καὶ τοὺς ἀνθρώπους, καὶ γίνονται θάνατοι. εἰ δὲ εἰς τὸ ὑδατῶδες τρίγωνον καὶ ἔστιν αὐξήψηφος, γίνεται βλάβη ὑπὸ πολυϋδρίας· εἰ δὲ λειψίψηφος, γίνεται ὑπὸ ἀνομβρίας.

49. Another.

μθ Ἄλλο.189

When the Sun enters the 1st minute of Aries, observe the star in aspect with the Lord of Midheaven or the star in aspect with the Lord of the Ascendant: that is the indicator of abundance and shortage. If this is found in Midheaven, it indicates shortage of the goods over which the sign in Midheaven dominates; if you find it moving forward,190 it likewise indicates shortage. If the sign in Midheaven is fixed, it indicates permanence of goods; if tropical, it indicates change in a short time. Moreover, observe the four turning points191 of the year and do the same, and know that if the star that is the indicator of abundance and shortage is found increasing, it indicates shortage of the goods |223v over which the sign dominates; if decreasing, abundance.

Ὅταν εἰσέρχηται ὁ ἥλιος εἰς τὸ αον λεπτὸν τοῦ Κριοῦ, ἴδε τὸν ἀστέρα τὸν σχηματίζοντα τὸν κύριον τοῦ μεσουρανήματος, ἢ τὸν ἀστέρα τὸν σχηματίζοντα τὸν κύριον τοῦ ὡροσκόπου, καὶ ἐκεῖνος ἐστὶν ὁ δηλωτικὸς περὶ εὐθηνίας καὶ κνιπείας. καὶ εἰ οὗτος εὑρεθῇ ἐν τῷ μεσουρανήματι, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν τῶν εἰδῶν ὧνπερ κυριεύει τὸ ζῴδιον τὸ μεσουράνημα· εἰ δὲ εὕρῃς αὐτὸ ὠρθοποδισμένον, ὁμοίως δηλοῖ κνιπείαν. εἰ δὲ ἔστι τὸ μεσουρανοῦν ζῴδιον στερεὸν, δηλοῖ μονὴν τῶν πραγμάτων· εἰ δὲ τροπικὸν, δηλοῖ ἀλλαγὴν μετ’ ὀλίγον. ἴδε δὲ καὶ εἰς τὰς τέσσαρας τροπὰς τοῦ χρόνου καὶ ποίει ὁμοίως, καὶ γίνωσκε ὅτι ὁ ἀστὴρ ὁ δηλωτικὸς εὐθηνίαν καὶ κνιπείαν· εἰ μὲν εὑρεθῇ [[αὐ]ξήψηφος, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν τῶν εἰδῶν |223v ὧνπερ κυριεύει τὸ ζῴδιον· εἰ δὲ λειψίψηφος, εὐθηνίαν.

50. Another.

ν Ἄλλο.192

Observe the Lord of the conjunction and of the opposition that occurs before the entrance of the Sun in the 1st degree of Aries, and take it as indicator of abundance and shortage: if it is increasing and is in aspect with an increasing star, it indicates shortage of the goods over which the sign dominates. Likewise, observe the Lord of the Ascendant of the year and the Lord of the Ascendant of the conjunction: if they are found benefics in the kentra, they indicate shortage of goods; if malefics in the kentra, they indicate abundance. Then, observe the two luminaries: if they are found in the kentra, they indicate shortage of nomismata193 and papyrus194—and the Sun for gold, the Moon for silver. Likewise, observe Venus and Mercury: Venus indicates what the Moon indicates, Mercury what the Sun indicates. If they are in the apoklimata, there is an abundance of nomismata and a shortage of purchasable goods. As soon as you see the benefics in aspect with them, say shortage, in a proportionate way; if malefics, abundance. Moreover, observe for the four turning points the previous new moon and full moon, and do the same. And know that, when the Lord of the Ascendant enters the Ascendant, or the other kentra, that is the time that indicates abundance and shortage. Likewise, the Lord of the conjunction or opposition too, or |224r when their configurations change into other configurations, and know that the stars that are northern indicate shortage, while the southern ones indicate abundance.

Ἴδε τὸν κύριον τῆς συνόδου καὶ τῆς πανσελήνου τῆς προγενομένης πρὸ τῆς εἰσελεύσεως τοῦ Ἡλίου εἰς τὸ αον λεπτὸν τοῦ Κριοῦ, καὶ ἐκεῖνον λάβε δηλωτικὸν εὐθηνίας καὶ κνιπείας· καὶ εἰ μὲν ἔστιν αὐξήψηφος καὶ σχηματίζει ἀστέρα αὐξήψηφον, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν τῶν εἰδῶν ὧν κυριεύει τὸ ζῴδιον. ὁμοίως ἴδε τὸν κύριον τοῦ ὡροσκόπου τοῦ χρόνου καὶ τὸν κύριον τοῦ ὡροσκόπου τῆς συνόδου καὶ εἰ μὲν εὑρεθῶσιν ἀγαθοποιοὶ ἐπίκεντροι, δηλοῦσι κνιπείαν πραγμάτων· εἰ δὲ κακοποιοὶ ἐπίκεντροι, δηλοῦσιν εὐθηνίαν. ἴδε δὲ καὶ τὰ δύο φῶτα· εἰ μὲν εὑρεθῶσιν ἐπίκεντροι, δηλοῦσι κνιπείαν νομισμάτων καὶ χαρτίων· καὶ ὁ μὲν ἥλιος περὶ χρυσοῦ, ἡ δὲ Σελήνη περὶ ἀργύρου. ὁμοίως ἴδε τὴν Ἀφροδίτην καὶ τὸν Ἑρμῆν· καὶ ἡ μὲν Ἀφροδίτη δηλοῖ ἃ δηλοῖ ἡ Σελήνη, ὁ δὲ Ἑρμῆς ἃ ὁ ἥλιος. καὶ εἰ μὲν εἰσὶν εἰς τὰ ἀποκλίματα, γίνεται εὐθηνία νομισμάτων καὶ κνιπεία πραγμάτων τῶν ἐξαγοραζομένων. καὶ καθὼς βλέπεις τοὺς ἀγαθοποιοὺς σχηματιζομένους εἰς αὐτὸν,195 λέγε κνιπείαν κατὰ τὸ ἀνάλογον· εἰ δὲ τοὺς κακοποιοὺς, εὐθηνίαν. ἴδε δὲ καὶ εἰς τέσσαρας τροπὰς τὴν προγενομένην σύνοδον καὶ πανσέληνον, καὶ ποίει ὁμοίως. καὶ γίνωσκε ὅτι ἐκεῖνος ἐστὶν ὁ δηλωτικὸς καιρὸς εὐθηνίαν καὶ κνιπείαν, ὅταν εἰσέρχηται ὁ κύριος τοῦ ὡροσκόπου εἰς τὸν ὡροσκόπον, ἢ εἰς τὰ ἄλλα κέντρα. ὁμοίως καὶ ὁ κύρ[[ι]ος [[τ]ῆς συνόδου ἢ πανσελήνου, ἢ |224r ὅταν ἐναλλάσσωνται τὰ σχήματα αὐτῶν εἰς ἕτερα σχήματα, καὶ γίνωσκε ὅτι οἱ ἀστέρες οἱ ὄντες βόρειοι δηλοῦσι κνιπείαν, οἱ δὲ νότιοι εὐθηνίαν.

51. Another

να Ἄλλο.196

When Mars is found as indicator and is in a fiery sign, it indicates shortage of copper and iron; if in an earthy (sign), it indicates shortage of bean and lentil, and any tree that bears red or sour fruit; if it is in a quadrupedal (sign), it indicates shortage of quadrupeds; if in a anthropomorphic sign, it indicates shortage of meat, and even more if it is in conjunction with Jupiter; if in a watery (sign), it indicates lack of rains, of reeds and of fishes. If Venus is the indicator and is found in Aries, it indicates lack of quicksilver and glass and of gazelles; if in a anthropomorphic (sign), it indicates lack of musicians and of beautiful-voiced birds; if in an airy (sign), it indicates shortage of apples and of roses and of sweet basil, and of all fruits that belong to it; if in watery (signs), it indicates lack of wine and of any sweet-fleshed fish. If Mercury is the indicator and is found in a fiery sign, it indicates lack of nomismata and noummia, and of any fiery good with impressions and letters; if in an earthy sign, it indicates lack of grain and barley; if in an anthropomorphic (sign), it indicates lack of large birds, such as ostriches and |224v similar birds; if it is in a watery (sign), it indicates lack of papyrus, rush mats, reeds and small vessels. If the Moon is the indicator and is in a fiery sign, it indicates lack of silver; if it is in an earthy (sign), it indicates lack of food day by day, and lack of cotton; if it is in a anthropomorphic (sign), it indicates lack of farmers; if in a watery (sign), it indicates a shortage of reeds, grass, and vegetables. If it is found in Libra, it indicates lack of every good sold by means of a balance; when it is in Taurus, or Leo or Scorpio or Aquarius, it indicates a great shortage, and especially in Taurus and Aquarius; when it is in Virgo, Pisces, and Gemini, it indicates abundance. And know that if Mars is found as the Lord of the year and is powerful, it indicates shortage of weapons; if it is in a quadrupedal (sign), it indicates shortage of leopards and hunting dogs; when it is in Sagittarius, it indicates shortage of Turkish and Khorasanian beasts; if it is in Gemini, it indicates shortage of hunting birds, such as hawks and the like; likewise, when it enters Sagittarius and is indicator […], it indicates shortage of Arabian beasts—Saturn indicates beasts […]; Venus, mules; Mercury, asses. If Saturn is found as the Lord of the year and is powerful, it indicates shortage of builders and craft⟨smen⟩. |225r Observe the star that is the indicator of the year, in which loci it is: if it is between Midheaven and the Ascendant, it indicates an increase of goods, that is, abundance; if in Midheaven, the end of the increase; if between Midheaven and the setting point, emptiness and a moderate state; likewise, if on (this) day it is found from the setting point to the lower culmination, it indicates emptiness of goods and abundance; from the lower culmination to the Ascendant, it indicates an increase. Observe the natures of the stars too, and know that Venus indicates scent; if Mars mingles with them, in whatever configuration, it indicates saffron and balsam; if Saturn, nard musk (?), ambergris,197 musk, and costus; if Mercury, carnation and spikenard; if Jupiter, [***]. If Venus is found in its apogee and Mercury is with it, it indicates shortage of scented goods. And the said things are true for those who seek for these. Observe that when (stars) are found setting , they indicate shortage of goods; if rising, they contrariwise indicate abundance, —like Saturn, Jupiter, and Mars. If the planet is in configuration, it indicates a change in goods; likewise, when it also is found from one sign to another, from a configuration to another, or from exaltation to dejection or from dejection |225v to exaltation; and when the planet that is the indicator is invisible and in the apoklimata, do not interpret abundance but ruin.

Ὅταν εὑρεθῇ ὁ Ἄρης δηλωτικὸς καὶ ἔστιν εἰς πυρῶδες ζῴδιον, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν χαλκοῦ καὶ σιδήρου· εἰ δὲ εἰς γεῶδες, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν φασωλίου198 καὶ φακῆς, καὶ παντὸς δένδρου ποιοῦντος καρπὸν ἀληθινὸν ἢ ὄξινον· εἰ δὲ ἔστι τετράπουν, δηλοῖ κνιπείας199 τῶν τετραπόδων· εἰ δὲ εἰς ἀνθρωποειδὲς ζῴδιον, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν τῶν κρεῶν καὶ μᾶλλον εἰ συνοδεύει τῷ Διΐ· εἰ δὲ εἰς ὑδατῶδες, δηλοῖ ἀνομβρίας καὶ λεῖψιν καλάμων καὶ ἰχθύων. εἰ δὲ ἔστιν ἡ Ἀφροδίτη δηλωτικὴ καὶ εὑρεθῇ ἐν τῷ Κριῷ,200 δηλοῖ λεῖψιν ὑδαργύρου201 καὶ ὑέλλου, καὶ δορκάδων· εἰ δὲ εἰς ἀνθρωποειδὲς, δηλοῖ λεῖψιν τῶν μουσικῶν ἀνδρῶν καὶ τῶν πετεινῶν τῶν καλλιφώνων· εἰ δὲ εἰς τὰ ἀερώδη,202 δηλοῖ κνιπείαν ὀπωρῶν μήλων, καὶ ῥόδων καὶ βασιλικῶν, καὶ πασῶν203 ὀπωρῶν τῶν ἀνηκουσῶν αὐτῇ· εἰ δὲ εἰς τὰ ὑδατώδη, δηλοῖ λεῖψιν204 οἴνου καὶ παντὸς ἰχθύος γλυκοσάρκου. εἰ δὲ ὁ205 Ἑρμῆς ἐστὶν ὁ δηλωτικὸς καὶ εὑρεθῇ εἰς πυρῶδες ζῴδιον,206 δηλοῖ λεῖψιν νομισμάτων καὶ νουμμίων, καὶ παντὸς εἴδους [[πυρ]ώδους ἔχοντος χαραγὴν καὶ γράμματα· εἰ δὲ εἰς γε[[ῶδες ζῴδιον],207 [[δ]ηλοῖ λεῖψιν σίτου καὶ κριθῆς· εἰ δὲ εἰς ἀνθρωποειδὲς, δηλοῖ λεῖψιν τῶν208 μακρῶν ὀρνέων, οἷον στρουθῶν καὶ |224v τῶν ὁμοίων· εἰ δὲ ἔνι εἰς ὑδατῶδες, δηλοῖ λεῖψιν χαρτίων καὶ ψιάθων καὶ καλάμων ⟨καὶ⟩209 κονδύλων.210 εἰ δὲ ἔστιν ἡ Σελήνη δηλωτικὴ καὶ ἔνι εἰς πυρῶδες ζῴδιον, δηλοῖ λεῖψιν ἀργύρου· εἰ δὲ εἰς γεῶδες, δηλοῖ λεῖψιν βρωμάτων ἡμέραν παρ’ ἡμέραν καὶ λεῖψιν βαμβακίων· εἰ δὲ ἔνι εἰς ἀνθρωποειδὲς, δηλοῖ λεῖψιν γεωργῶν· εἰ δὲ εἰς ὑδατῶδες, δηλοῖ λεῖψιν καλάμων καὶ χόρτων καὶ λαχάνων. εἰ δὲ εὑρεθῇ ἐν τῷ Ζυγῷ, δηλοῖ λεῖψιν παντὸς εἴδους διὰ ζυγοῦ πιπρασκομένου· καὶ ὅταν ἔνι εἰς τὸν Ταῦρον ἢ τὸν Λέοντα ἢ τὸν Σκορπίον ἢ τὸν Ὑδροχόον, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν μεγίστην καὶ μάλιστα ἐν Ταύρῳ καὶ Ὑδροχόῳ· ὅταν δὲ ἔνι ἐν Παρθένῳ καὶ Ἰχθύσι καὶ Διδύμοις, δηλοῖ εὐθηνίαν. καὶ γίνωσκε ὅτι ὁ Ἄρης εἰ εὑρεθῇ κύριος τοῦ χρόνου211 καὶ ἔστι {καὶ} ἐνδύναμος, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν τῶν ὅπλων· εἰ δὲ εἰς τετράπουν, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν πάρδων καὶ λαγωνικῶν σκυλίων· καὶ ὅταν ἔνι εἰς τὸν Τοξότην, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν Τουρκικῶν καὶ Χωροσαντικῶν ἀλόγων· εἰ δὲ ἔνι εἰς τοὺς Διδύμους, δηλοῖ κνιπε[[ίαν] ὀρνέων κυνηγῶν, οἷον ἱεράκων καὶ τῶν ὁμοίων· ὁμοίως καὶ [[ὅτ]αν εἰσέρχηται εἰς τὸν Τοξότην καὶ ἔστι δηλωτικὸς […], δηλοῖ κνιπείαν ἀλόγων Σαρακηνικῶν· καὶ ὁ Κρόνος δηλοῖ ἀλ[όγων…]· ἡ Ἀφροδίτη βορδωνίων· ὁ Ἑρμῆς ὄνων. ὁ Κρόνος εἰ εὑρεθῇ κύρ[ιος τοῦ χρόνου] καὶ ἔστιν ἐνδύναμος, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν κτιστῶν καὶ τῶν ἐργα[…]· |225r καὶ ἴδε τὸν δηλωτικὸν ἀστέρα τοῦ χρόνου ἐν ποίοις τόποις212 ἐστίν· εἰ μὲν ἀναμεταξὺ τοῦ μεσουρανήματος καὶ τοῦ ὡροσκόπου, δηλοῖ αὔξησιν τῶν πραγμάτων τουτέστι κνιπείαν·213 εἰ δὲ εἰς τὸ μεσουράνημα, τέλος αὐξήσεως· εἰ δὲ ἀναμεταξὺ τοῦ μεσουρανήματος καὶ τοῦ δύνοντος, χαύνωσιν καὶ μεσότητα· ὁμοίως ἐν ἡμέρᾳ εἰ εὑρεθῇ ἀπὸ τοῦ δύνοντος εἰς τὸ ὑπὸ γῆν,214 δηλοῖ χαύνωσιν τῶν πραγμάτων καὶ εὐθηνίαν· ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ ὑπογείου ἕως τοῦ ὡροσκόπου, δηλοῖ αὔξησιν. ἴδε δὲ καὶ τὰς [κ]ράσεις τῶν ἀστέρων καὶ γίνωσκε ὅτι ἡ Ἀφροδίτη δηλοῖ τὰ μυρετικά· εἰ δὲ συγκιρνᾶται ταύταις ὁ Ἄρης καθ’ οἱονδήποτε σχῆμα, δηλοῖ περὶ κρόκκου καὶ χρίσματος· εἰ δὲ Κρόνος, δηλοῖ περὶ σ[τα]χώμοσχον καὶ ἄμβαρ καὶ μόσχον καὶ κόστον· εἰ δὲ ὁ Ἑρμῆς, τὸ καρυόφυλλον καὶ τὸ στάχος· εἰ δὲ ὁ Ζεύς, [***].215 [εἰ δὲ εὑ]ρεθῇ ἡ Ἀφροδίτη εἰς τὸ ἀπόγειον αὐτῆς καὶ μετ’ αὐτῆς ὁ Ἑρμῆς, [δηλοῖ] κνιπείαν τῶν μυρετίκων εἰδῶν. καὶ τὰ λεγόμενα ἀληθῆ [εἰσὶν τ]οῖς ἐρευνῶσι ταῦτα. ἴδε δὲ ὅταν εὑρεθῶσιν […] δυτικοὶ, δηλοῦσι κνιπείαν πραγμάτων· εἰ δὲ ἀνα[τολικοί], δηλοῦσι εὐθηνίαν, ὥσπερ Κρόνος καὶ Ζεὺς καὶ Ἄρης, τὸ ἐναντίον· [εἰ δὲ σχηματ]ίζῃ ὁ ἀστὴρ, δηλοῖ ἀλλαγὴν πραγμάτων· ὁμοίως καὶ ὅταν [εὑρεθῇ] ἀπὸ ζῳδίου εἰς ζῴδιον, ἀπὸ σχήματος εἰς ἕτερον ἢ [ἀπὸ ὑψώματος] εἰς ταπείνωμα, ἢ ἀπὸ ταπεινώματος |225v εἰς ὕψωμα, καὶ ὅταν ἔστιν ὁ ἀστὴρ ὁ δηλωτικὸς ὕπαυγος καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἀποκλίμασιν, μὴ κρίνῃς216 εὐθηνίαν ἀλλὰ φθοράν.

Locate the Ascendant of the conjunction, and observe the kentra, and if a planet that has dignity is found there, in the Ascendant, that one is the indicator of the Ascendant, and if this is increasing and in its lower culmination, it indicates a lack of goods, namely, shortage; if it is decreasing and in its lower culmination, abundance; if it is increasing and is in aspect with another increasing planet, say surely shortage until the configuration is complete, and even more if the planet that is in aspect with it is a planet that makes a station.217 When the configuration is complete, look at which it is in configuration with: if you find a similarly increasing planet, it indicates shortage; if a decreasing one, the opposite. When a planet is increasing and is out of house, it indicates shortage, but a little one; if decreasing and out of house, it indicates a great one. If a planet is not found in the kentra, observing the Lord of the Ascendant and interpreting according to it as […] to the indicator and seeing if the Lord of the Ascendant is in its proper state and increasing, it indicates shortage […]; if the opposite, understand the opposite.

Ποίησον ὡροσκόπον τῆς συνόδου καὶ ἴδε τὰ κέντρα καὶ εἰ μὲν εὑρεθῇ ἐκεῖ ἀστὴρ λόγον ἔχων εἰς τὸν ὡροσκόπον, ἐκεῖ[νος] ἐστὶ δηλωτικὸς τοῦ ὡροσκόπου· καὶ εἰ ἔστιν οὗτος αὐξήψ[ηφος] καὶ εἰς τὸ ὑπόγειον αὐτοῦ, δηλοῖ λεῖψιν πραγμάτων ἤγουν κνιπείαν· εἰ δὲ λειψίψηφος καὶ εἰς τὸ ὑπόγειον αὐτοῦ, εὐθηνίαν· εἰ δὲ ἔστιν αὐξήψηφος καὶ σχηματίζει ἑτέρῳ ἀστέρι αὐξ[ή]ψηφῳ, λέγε κνιπείαν λίαν ἕως οὗ διέλθῃ τὸ σχῆμα καὶ μᾶλλον εἰ ὁ σχηματίζων αὐτὸν ἐστὶν ἀστὴρ στηρί[ζων]. καὶ ὅταν διέλθῃ τὸ σχῆμα, βλέπε τίνι σχημ[α]τίζει· καὶ εἰ μὲν εὕρῃς ὅμοιον ἀστέρα αὐξήψηφον, [δηλοῖ] κνιπείαν· εἰ δὲ λειψίψηφον, τὸ ἐναντίον. καὶ ὅτα[ν δὲ] ἔνι ὁ ἀστὴρ αὐξήψηφος καὶ ἀνοίκειος, δηλοῖ κνι[πείαν], ἀλλ’ ὀλίγην· εἰ δὲ λειψίψηφος καὶ ἀνοίκειος, δ[ηλοῖ] πολλήν. εἰ δὲ οὐχ εὑρεθῇ ἀστὴρ ἐν τοῖς κέντροις, [ἰδὼν τὸν] κύριον τοῦ ὡροσκόπου καὶ κρίνων κατ’ αὐτὸ ὥ[σπερ …] ἐπὶ τοῦ δηλωτικοῦ, καὶ ἰδὼν τὸν κ[ύριον τοῦ ὡροσκόπου] εἰ μὲν ἔστιν οἰκεῖος καὶ αὐξήψηφος, δηλοῖ κ[νιπείαν …· εἰ δὲ] τὸ ἐναντίον, νόει τὸ ἐναντίον.

|226r Each month, when the Sun enters the 1st part of the (appropriate) sign, locate the Ascendant and observe in which part the Moon is: if it is found in a straight sign, say shortage of the goods over which the sign dominates, and especially if benefics are in aspect with it; if it is in a oblique sign, it indicates abundance of that good, and even more if malefics are in aspect with it. Locate the Ascendant for the 4th locus in the same way too: when the Sun or Saturn enter the beginnings of the tropical signs, and when the Sun moves through the 19th degree of Libra, look at as you observed the first (part) as well.

|226r [Κα]θ’ ἕκαστον μῆνα ὅταν εἰσέρχητ[αι] ὁ ἥλιος εἰς τὸ αον [μέρος] τοῦ ζῳδίου, ποίησον ὡροσκόπον καὶ ἴδε τὴν Σελήνην εἰς ποῖον μέρος τυγχάνει· καὶ εἰ μὲν εὑρεθῇ εἰς ὄρθιον ζ[ῴδιον], λέγε κνιπείαν τοῦ εἴδους οὗ κυριεύει τὸ ζῴδιον, καὶ μάλιστα εἰ βλέπουσιν αὐτὴν ἀγαθοποιοί· εἰ δὲ εἰς λοξὸν, δηλοῖ εὐθηνίαν τοῦ εἴδους ἐκείνου καὶ μᾶλλον εἰ βλέπουσιν αὐτὴν κακοποιοί. ποίησον δὲ ὡροσκόπον καὶ εἰς τὸν δον τρόπον218 ὁμοίως, καὶ ὅταν εἰσέρχηται ὁ ἥλιος ἢ ὁ Κρόνος εἰς τὰς ἀρχὰς τῶν τροπικῶν ζῳδίων, καὶ ὅταν πορεύεται ὁ ἥλιος τὴν ιθην μοῖραν τοῦ Ζυγοῦ, βλέπε ὥσπερ καὶ πρῶτον ἔβλεπες.

Another.

[Ἄλλ]ο.

Look at the turn of the year, and if you find the anaphora of the Ascendant happening to be near to the straight, and the Lord of the Ascendant is weakened or unfortunate or in its own dejection, it indicates abundance for the 1st quarter of the year. Observe the second quarter from the lower culmination and its epanaphorai according to the straight degrees, whether they are more, fewer or equal. Observe the Lord of the fourth and interpret it as you interpreted the Ascendant, because if the epanaphorai and degrees are found more than those, they indicate shortage; if fewer, abundance; |226v if equal, equality. Likewise, also from the 7th and from its Lord in the third quarter, and from Midheaven and its Lord in the 4th. Observe the Lord, and if it is from its exaltation to its dejection, it indicates shortage; if from the dejection to the exaltation, abundance.

Βλέπε εἰς τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τοῦ χρόνου, καὶ εἰ μὲν εὕρῃς τὴν ἀναφορὰν τοῦ ὡροσκόπου ἐγγὺς ὑπάρχουσαν τῶν ὀρθῶν, ἔνι δὲ ἀδύναμος ἢ κεκακωμένος κύριος τοῦ ὡροσκόπου ἢ εἰς τὸ ταπείνωμα αὐτοῦ, δηλοῖ εὐθηνίαν εἰς τὸ αον τοῦ χρόνου τεταρτημόριον. ἴδε δὲ καὶ [ε]ἰς τὸ δεύτερον τεταρτημόριον ἀπὸ τοῦ ὑπογείου κέντρου καὶ τὰς ἐπανα[φορ]ὰς αὐτοῦ κατὰ τὰς ὀρθὰς μοίρας οἱ πλείο[νες] ἢ ἐλάττονες ἢ ἶσαι. ἴδε καὶ τὸν κύριον τοῦ [τετά]ρτου καὶ κρίνε ὡς ἔκρινας εἰς τὸν ὡροσκόπον, διότι [εἰ ε]ὑρεθῶσιν αἱ ἐπαναφοραὶ καὶ μοῖραι πλείονες [αὐ]τῶν, δηλοῦσι κνιπείαν· εἰ δὲ ἐλάττ[ον]ες, εὐθηνίαν· |226v εἰ δὲ ἶσαι, ἰσ[ότ]ητα. ὁμοίως καὶ ἀπὸ τοῦ ζου καὶ τοῦ κυρίου αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ [τρ]ίτον τεταρτημόριον, ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ μεσουρανήματος καὶ τοῦ κυ[ρίου] αὐτοῦ εἰς τὸ δον. ἴδε δὲ καὶ τὸν κύ[ριον], καὶ εἰ μὲν ὑπάρχῃ ἀπὸ τοῦ ὑψώματος ἕως τοῦ ταπεινώματος αὐτοῦ, δηλοῖ κνιπείαν· ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ τ[α]πεινώματος ἕως τοῦ ὑψώματος, εὐθηνίαν.

It is necessary to understand how the universal Ascendant of the year is found, as follows.

Δεῖ εἰδέναι ὡς εὑρίσκεται οὕτως ὁ καθολικὸς τοῦ χρόνου ὡροσκόπος.

In the month of March, 14th day of year 6619,219 hour 3 minutes 21 of the night. In this hour the Sun enters the 1st minute of Aries and the Ascendant of this entry is found in Constantinople in 10° 56ʹ of Scorpio, in the terms of Jupiter; the universal Ascendant in 0° 5ʹ of Capricorn; the universal Midheaven in 1° 50ʹ of Libra; the orbit220 of the Ascendant of the city in 25° of Leo, in the terms of Saturn.

Μηνὶ Μαρτίῳ ιδ ἡμέρᾳ {τρίτῃ} ἔτους ͵ςχιθ ὥρᾳ [τ]ῆς [νυκτὸς]221 γ λεπτοῖς κα. κατὰ ταύτην τὴν ὥραν εἰσέρχεται ὁ ἥλιος εἰς τ[ὸ αον]222 λεπτὸν τοῦ Κριοῦ καὶ εὑρίσκεται ὡροσκόπος τῆς εἰσόδου ταύτης ἐν τῇ Κω[ν]σταντινουπόλει,223 Σκορπίου μοίρᾳ ι λεπτοῖς νϛ, ὅριος224 Διός· κοσμικὸ[ς] ὡροσκόπος, Αἰγοκέρωτος μοίρᾳ 𐆊 λεπτοῖς ε· κοσμικὸν μεσουράνημα, Ζυγοῦ μοίρᾳ α λεπτοῖς ν· ὁ δὲ περίπατος τοῦ ὡροσκόπου τῆς πόλεως, Λέοντος μοίρᾳ κε, ὅριος225 [Κρόνου].226

Example of finding them: the Sun is found in 29° 37ʹ of Pisces, and what is left for the completion of the 30° of Pisces are 23ʹ. I multiplied these by the 24 hours of the day-and-night, and they became 552; I divided these by the daily motion of the Sun, which is 59ʹ 8ʹʹ, and 9 hours 20 minutes were found. From them 6 hours are subtracted, those from the distance up to the setting of the Sun: there remain hours of the night…227

Ὑπόδειγμα τῶν228 εὑρέσεως τούτων· εὑρέθη ἥλιος Ἰχθύων κθ λζ, καὶ εἰ[σὶ]229 τὰ λείποντα πρὸς ἀναπλήρωσιν τῶν λ μοιρῶν τῶ[ν Ἰχθύων]230 λεπτὰ κγ. ταῦτα ἐπολλαπλασίασα εἰς τὰς κ[δ ὥρας]231 τοῦ νυχθημέρου, καὶ ἐγένοντο φνβ· ἐμέρι[σα]232 ταῦτα εἰς τὸ ἡμεροδρόμημα τοῦ Ἡλίου ὃ ἦν233 [λεπτὰ]234 νθ πρῶτα δεύτερα η, καὶ εὑρέθησαν ὧραι θ λεπτὰ κ. [ἀπὸ]235 αὐτῶν ἀφῃρέθησαν αἱ ἀπὸ τοῦ ἀποστήματος ἄχρι [δ]υσμῶν Ἡλίου ὧραι ϛ, λοιπαὶ ὧραι τῆς νυκτὸς236 […]

Appendix 1

39Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, phil. gr. 115 (olim 134) [diktyon 71229]

40Constantinople; 1111-1169; or. paper; fols. 1-228 + 122/1; mm 265 × 175.


41Guard leaves. Absent; a modern table of contents is located on a paper sheet attached to the inside cover of the codex; «III.D.20» is written twice, in pencil and red pastel.

42Folio numbering. A continuous folio numbering, in modern numerals and in brown ink, was marked in the upper outer margin of each folio recto, probably by P. Lambeck (1628-1680). A more recent numbering was added, in pencil, in the lower outer margin of each verso. There are three series of ancient folio numberings (the first two are in correspondence of the pinakes of the contents of the manuscript). An incomplete numbering in Greek letters on the recto of the folios of the 1st quire, not by the main copyist: β (2), δ-ε (4-5). An incomplete numbering in Greek letters on the central lower margin of the recto of each folio of the 25th quire (the only exception is the first folio of the quire, where the numerals is in the middle lower margin of the verso (on the recto there is the quire number), not by the main copyist: α-ε (157v, 158-161). An incomplete numbering in Greek letters on the internal lower margin of the recto of each folio of quires 32-33: α-η (210-217); α-β (218-219), δ (221), ϛ (223).

43Binding. 1754 binding by Gerard van Swieten (1700-1772). On the upper margin: «E*A*B*C*V*», on the lower margin: «17*G*L*B*V*S*B*54».

44Quire structure. 6, 1 (7), 6 (17), 78 (73), 68-2 (79), 68-2 (85), 98 (156), 16-1 (161), 88 (225), 14-1 (228).

45Quire numbering. There are two different series of ancient quire numbering in Greek letters on the lower internal margin of the recto of the 1st folio of each quire: Q1 incomplete: δ (11), ζ (18), θ-ιδ (34-74), ιϛ-κε (86-157); Q2 incomplete: α-δ (162-186), ϛ (204).

  • 237 Two quires are lost.
  • 238 It includes fol. 122/1.

46Original quires. Fols. 18-2 (6), 18-7 (7), 18-5 (10), 18-2 (16), 18-8 (16), 18-7 (17), 28 (17),237 88 (73), 28-2 (85), 98 (156),238 18-3 (161), 88 (225), 14-1 (228).

47Conservation state. The manuscript has lost several quires and folios; the folios are often damaged and stained, with loss of text.

48Blank folios. Fols. 1v, 6r, 228r-v.

49Codicological units. The manuscript, copied and set up by two contemporary hands, consists of two different codicological units, W1: fols. 2r-161v; W2: fols. 162r-227r.

50Dimensions and writing surfaces. Mm 265 × 175. W1: 20 [195] 50 × 20 [120] 35; W2: 25 [210] 30 × 20 [120] 35

51Ruling. W1, W2: not visible.

52Lines. W1: ~18-20; W2: ~23-26 (fols. 161-218); 21-22 (fols. 219-227).

53Copyists. The main texts are copied by two copyists of the mid 12th century (fols. 2r-5r; 7r-227v). C1 (fols. 2r-160v, 161r-v [l. 21-23], 219r-227r) is characterised by great cursivity, large usage of ligatures and abbreviations, duplication of connecting strokes, enlargement of letters and accents. C2 (fols. 161r-218v) contemporary to C1, shares most of the characteristics of C1, but his script is smaller in modulus, denser and more frantic.

  • 239 μανουὴλ τ(οῦ) νικηφόρ(ου) |1 ἐπήρ[…] [τ](ὸν) βλεμίδ[ην], ἵνα[ |2 διακομίσῃ τ[ῷ] βασιλεύοντι |3 τῷ δ (...)

54Marginalia and annotators. Ca (fols. 2r-3r, 4r, 6v) second half of the 12th century which annotates the table of contents and adds a horoscopic thema dated and located to Constantinople, Sept. 10th, 1169, circa 7:29 a.m. Cb (fol. 33v) is a mid-13th century hand which records the total sun eclipse of Oct. 6th, 1241. Cc (fol. 218v) is a hand of the second half of the 13th century, characterised by large β, enlargement of the round traits, and inclusions of smaller letters into the enlarged ones. Cd (fols. 4v-5v, 60r, 116v-117r, 142v, 197r) is a later hand, which corrected the table of contents and added missing titles in the margins. Ce (fol. 2r) is a 15th century hand.239 Cf (fols. 33v, 122v, 127r, 163r, 165r, 168v, 172r, 173v-174v, 175v, 178r-178v, 197r, 198v-199v, 200v, 202v-203v, 210r-v, 212v-213r, 215r, 216v-218v, 228) mostly added reading notes and prayers and traced anew in black ink some letters washed away by humidity. Cg (fol. 224r) is a modern hand that traced some words anew after the first restoration of the manuscript.

  • 240 The beginning of the manuscript is lost, it starts with ch. κζ Ἡφαιστίονος περὶ καταρχῶν.
  • 241 For an analysis of the horoscopic data, see supra, Section 1.
  • 242 The text on fols. 7r (l. 6)-7v (l. 1) corresponds to the one published in CCAG, IX, p. 176-179: 177 (...)
  • 243 Ptol., Apotel., II.9.11-II.14.4, ed. Hübner 1998, p. 139 (l. 754)-160 (l. 1086): the text ends ex a (...)
  • 244 It is a recension and conflation of different (and separated) chapters: Theoph., Apotel., 2-6 and 9 (...)
  • 245 Ed. CCAG, VIII.1, p. 261-263 (l. 6), see also A, fols. 94v-95r.
  • 246 Valens, Anth. app. XV (= Anth. III.6, 1-21), ed. Pingree 1986, p. 424-425.
  • 247 The manuscript contains ch. 1-13 of the work as it can be read in Pa, fols. 22r-43r (l. 5) and T, f (...)
  • 248 The chapters are anonymous, apart from ch. 27 attributed to Hephaestion of Thebes: κζ Ἡφαιστίονος π (...)
  • 249 The collection contains Theoph., De in. var., 5-12 and 19-30 (as indicated in the table of contents (...)
  • 250 L, fol. 82v (l. 25-32).
  • 251 F1: ed. CCAG, I, p. 138-139; L, fols. 84r (l. 16)-84v (l. 24), see László 2020, p. 6-11: 7.
  • 252 Heph., Ep.2, III.0-III.1.6, ed. Pingree 1974, p. 81-83. For a comparison with the fragments contain (...)
  • 253 A heavily rewritten recension of Paul of Alexandria’s Elementa apotelesmatica, ch. 25 with marginal (...)
  • 254 Only ch. on fols. 117r (l. 11)-117v (l. 15); 118r (l. 5)-118v (l. 2) are attributed to ʾAbū Maʿšar (...)
  • 255 Ed. CCAG, VI, p. 79.
  • 256 Heph., Apotel., III.2.6-12, ed. Pingree 1973, p. 229-230. It is witnessed to in L, fols. 83v (l. 35 (...)
  • 257 Details on this sequence of texts are as follows. Two short excerpts, the second of which contains (...)
  • 258 For a description of the contents, see CCAG, VI, p. 22-25. The chapters included in the collection (...)
  • 259 Max., Paraph.1, I.8, 11, 6, and 9 (with two added paragraph at the end on fols. 128v [l. 15]-129r [ (...)
  • 260 Heph., Ep.2, III, 27, ed. Pingree 1974, p. 124-125.
  • 261 Theoph., De in. bell., ch. 41.
  • 262 Heph., Apotel., III.8, ed. Pingree 1973, p. 259-260.
  • 263 Heph., Ep.2, III.13-14, ed. Pingree 1974, p. 110-112 (= Doroth., Carmen, app. V.39, 1-40, ed. Pingr (...)
  • 264 Heph., Apotel., III.23-24, ed. Pingree 1973, p. 276-277.
  • 265 Ed. CCAG, VIII.1, p. 172-177. W pertains to the same recension of M and MS Paris, BnF, grec 2419 [d (...)
  • 266 Ed. CCAG, I, p. 171-172 (l. 20). The chapter is also contained in L, fols. 145r (l. 10)-145v (l. 12 (...)
  • 267 F14-F15: ed. CCAG, VI, p. 80 (l. 9-18 and 19-33), see László 2020, p. 6-11: 7.
  • 268 In addition, on fols. 143v (l. 19)-145r (l. 10) one reads a chapter concerning how to find the risi (...)
  • 269 One folio at the end is missing, the list ends with ch. 42: περὶ εὐθηνίας εἰδῶν καὶ κνιπείας ἀπὸ Σα (...)
  • 270 Ed. Boer 1962, p. 1-144.
  • 271 Ed. Pingree 2004, p. 373-374, and supra, Section 3.
  • 272 Ed. supra, Section 3.
  • 273 Doroth., Carmen, app. IV 1, 5-9, lastly edited in Pingree 1976, p. 374, and supra, Section 3. See a (...)
  • 274 Ed. supra, Section 3.
  • 275 The text on fol. 227r is too fragmented to be read, even if an ἔτος ϛ[…] [μ]αΐου and a fragment of (...)

55Contents. [W1] 1. (fols. 2r-5v) Table of contents;240 2. (fol. 6v) Anon., Horoscopic thema (1169);241 3. (fols. 7r-v) ⟨Anon. Pythagoreus, Excerpt of de temporum dominatu⟩.242 Inc. […]νοκρα. […]χθεῖσαν θε[…] ταχοῦ κοινὴν ποιησαμ[…] τὴν ἐπ[…]εψιν. Des.: πρὸς μὲν γὰρ τῷ ἀπηλιωτικῷ ὁρίζοντι ὁ τόπος ἐκπεσὼν τήν τε καταρχήν; 4. (fols. 8r-16v) ⟨Ptolemy, Apotelesmatica⟩.243 Inc.: Κατάστασιν, καυσωνίας καὶ πνεύματα θέρμα λοιμικὰ καὶ συντικτικά. Des.: λεπτὴ μὲν γὰρ καὶ καθαρὰ φαινομένη καὶ μηδὲν ἔχουσα περὶ (sic); 5. (fols. 17r-22r [l. 11]) ⟨Theophilus of Edessa, Apotelesmatica⟩.244 Inc.: […]νος ὑγραντικὸς εἰς τὰ προηγούμενα τῶν Χηλῶν ἢ τοῦ Ζυγοῦ. Des.: κρύψιν ἑῴαν ποιούμενος βροντῶν ἐστὶν γεννητικὸς τὴν μεγίστην κατάστασιν, καὶ στηρίζων, ἀσύμφερος ἡγεμόσι; 6. (fols. 22r [l. 11]-24r [l. 13]) ⟨Balchus, Apotelesmatica⟩.245 Inc.: Σκόπει τὴν ἐαρινὴν τροπήν. Des.: καὶ τοῦ ἑπομένου κέντρου καὶ τῶν ἀστέρων κατὰ τὴν ἀναφερομένην δύναμιν τῶν κρειττόνων ἀποφαίνονται; 7. (fols. 24r [l. 14]-25r [l. 15]) Valens, ⟨Anthologiae⟩.246 Inc.: Οὐάλεντος. ἐμοὶ δὲ οὐκ ἔδοξεν ὥς τινες κατὰ τὴν ἑπτάζωνον τὰ ὅρια. Des.: καὶ πρὸς τὸν κύριον τῶν ὁρίων καὶ τοὺς συνόντας ἀστέρας ἢ μαρτυροῦντας ἀποφαίνου; 8. (fols. 25r [l. 16]-73r [l. 3]) ⟨Theophilus of Edessa, Apotelesmatica⟩.247 Tit.: ι Τὰ παραλειπόμενα τῶν κοσμικῶν ἀποτελεσμάτων τῆς τῶν φωστήρων συζυγίας ἀποτελέσματα. Inc.: Κρόνος κυριεύων τῶν ὁρίων τῆς συζυγίας τῶν φώτων ἐν Κριῷ. Des.: συσχηματιζομένων τοῖς φωσὶ καὶ τῷ ὡροσκόπῳ ἀληθῆ καὶ βέβαια; 9. (fols. 73r [l. 3]-83v [l. 5]) Anon., Astrological chapters.248 Tit.: κγ Καταρχαὶ πρὸς τὰ ὅρια τῶν ἀστέρων πρὸς Κρόνον. Inc.: Κρόνος ὡροσκοπῶν ἐν ἰδίοις, χαλεπός. Des.: ἡμῖν δὲ τὰ τρίγωνα οὐ δοκεῖ καὶ ἀσθενῆ εἶναι; 10. (fols. 83v [l. 6]-106v [l. 9]; 109v [l. 15]-114v [l. 3]) ⟨Theophilus of Edessa, De initiis variis⟩:249 a. (fols. 83v [l. 6]-101r [l. 17]) Tit.: λ Περὶ συνοδοπανσελήνων καὶ καταρχῶν. Inc.: Σύνοδοι καὶ πανσέληνοι ὑπὸ κακοποιῶν μὴ θεωρείσθωσαν. Des.: καὶ τὰ ἀποτελέσματα γίνονται; b. (fols. 101r [l. 18]-106v [l. 9]; 109v [l. 15]-114v [l. 3]) Tit.: ν Τὰ β κεφάλαια τῆς δωδεκατρόπου τῶν καταρχῶν. Inc.: Τοῦ δευτέρου τόπου ὁ οἰκοδεσπότης. Des.: πρὸς θηλυγονίαν; 11. (fols. 106v [l. 9]-107r [l. 3]) Anon., Scholium.250 Inc.: Σχόλιον· ὅτι ἐν ταῖς καταρχαῖς. Des.: καὶ οὕτως ἐπὶ ἑκάστης πράξεως; 12. (fols. 107r [l. 4]-108v [l. 10]) Julianus of Laodicea, Fragmenta.251 Tit.: νη Ἰουλιανοῦ περὶ καταρχῆς. Inc.: Ὁ δὲ θεῖος Πετόσιρις λέγων. Des.: χρῶ τῷ ὡροσκόπῳ; 13. (fols. 108v [l. 11]-109v [l. 15]) ⟨Hephaestion of Thebes, Epitoma II⟩.252 Tit.: νθ Περὶ καθολικῶν καταρχῶν. Inc.: Ἐπὶ πάσης τοίνυν καταρχῆς. Des.: κατὰ καιρὸν δυνατοῖς; 14. (fols. 114v [l. 4]-117r [l. 10]) Anon., Astrological chapter and scholium.253 Inc.: Σελήνη ἐν ὁρίοις ἢ τόποις Ἑρμοῦ. Des.: ἀπὸ τὴν ἀρχήν; 15. (fols. 117r [l. 11]-120r) ʾAbū Maʿšar, Astrological chapters.254 a. (fols. 117r [l. 11]-117v [l. 15]; 118r [l. 5]-120r) Tit.: ο Περὶ τῶν ὑποδεδειγμένων τετραγώνων τοῦ Ἡλίου καὶ τῆς Σελήνης ὅτι οὐκ ἔσται βλαπτικὰ. Inc.: Εἶπεν ὁ Ἀπομάσαρ· ταῦτα τὰ τετράγωνα. Des.: Αἰγοκέρωτι κακόν, Ὑδροχόῳ μέσον, Ἰχθύσιν καλόν; b. (fols. 117v [l. 15]-118r ([l. 4]); ⟨ps.-⟩Hermes Trismegistus, General selection of inceptions.255 Tit.: οα Ἑρμοῦ τοῦ Τρισμεγίστου ἐπιλογὴ καθολικὴ τῶν καταρχῶν ἀπὸ τῆς Σελήνης οὔσης ἐν τοῖς ιβ ζῳδίοις. Inc.: Περὶ τοῦ συναντῆσαι βασιλεῖ καὶ σουλτάνῳ ἐν Κριῷ; Des.: καὶ ἐν Ἰχθύσι καλή; 16. (fols. 120v-121r [l. 10]) ⟨Hephaestion of Thebes, Apotelesmatica.256 Tit.: ϙα Ποταπὸν ἕξει τέλος· ἕκαστον τῶν πραττομένων γνῶναι οὕτως. Inc.: Ἐπιβλέπου τῆς Σελήνης τὰ φῶτα. Des.: ἢ εἰς τὸ τούτου διάμετρον ἢ τετράγωνον; 17. (fols. 121r [l. 10]-122v [l. 10]) Anon., Astrological chapters.257 Inc.: ὅτι πᾶς ἀστὴρ τὸν ἴδιον διαμετρεῖ οἶκον. Des.: αἱ διὰ τοῦ κέντρου ἀγόμεναι πλευραί; 18. (fols. 122v [l. 10]-160v) Anon., Astrological chapters with diagram.258 Tit.: ϙβ Περὶ εἰσόδων ἀνθρώπου. Inc.: Λαβὼν διὰ δακτύλων τὸν ὡροσκόπον. Des.: ἐὰν δὲ τὸ ἀπόγειον τοῦ Ἡλίου ἔ (sic): a. (fols. 127r [l. 17]-129r [l. 5]; 129v [l. 12]-130r [l. 2]; 137r [l. 5]-139r [l. 6]; 139v [l. 14]-140r [l. 1]) Maximus, De actionum auspiciis (Paraph.1)259 Tit.: ϙθ Περὶ δραπετῶν Μαξίμου. Inc.: Σελήνης Κριῷ· ὁ φυγὼν ταχέως εὑρεθήσεται. Des.: ἡ Σελήνη συνοδεύῃ τῷ Ἡλίῳ ἢ διαμετρῇ; b. (fol. 125v [l. 1-8]) ⟨Hephaestion of Thebes, Epitoma II⟩.260 Tit.: ϙζ Περὶ ἐγγύης. Inc.: Εἰ δὲ βουληθῇς μὴ ἐγγυήσασθαί τινα. Des.: παρά σου τὴν ἐνόχλησιν ἐκφεύξῃ; c. (fol. 130r [l. 3-10]) ⟨Theophilus of Edessa, De initiis bellicis⟩.261 Tit.: ργ Πότε δεῖ γράμματα πέμπειν. Inc.: Ὅτε γράμματα πέμπεις. Des.: διαπράττων τῆς βουλῆς οὐκ ἀποτύχῃς; d. (fol. 132v [l. 2-9]) ⟨Hephaestion of Thebes, Apotelesmatica⟩.262 Tit.: ρθ Περὶ ὅρκου. Inc.: Μετέρχονται οἱ ὅρκοι τοὺς ἐπιόρκους. Des.: οἱ γὰρ ἐπιορκοῦντες οὐ ποινηλατοῦνται; e. (fols. 140r [l. 1]-140v [l. 13]) ⟨Hephaestion of Thebes, Epitoma II⟩.263 Tit.: ρκ Περὶ χειρουργίας. Inc.: Τὰς δὲ χειρουργίας τῶν μελῶν ποιεῖσθαι χρὴ τῆς Σελήνης. Des.: τὴν δὲ κοιλίαν καθαίρειν ἁρμόζει ἐν τῷ Καταβιβάζοντι συνδέσμῳ; f. (fols. 150v [l. 6]-151v [l. 7]) ⟨Hephaestion of Thebes, Apotelesmatica⟩.264 Tit.: ρκδ Περὶ ἐμπράκτων ὡρῶν καὶ ὀνείρων. Inc.: Περὶ δὲ ἐμπράκτων ὡρῶν ἐν παντὶ τῷ ἐγχειριζομένῳ. Des.: ἡ δὲ λ ἀνέκβατος; g. (fols. 152v [l. 15]-156r [l. 14]) Hermes, Methodus mystica.265 Tit.: Ἑρμοῦ τοῦ Τρισμεγίστου μέθοδος μυστικὴ εἰς πᾶσαν καταρχὴν ἐπιτήδειος. Inc.: Πρὸ πάντων δεῖ τὸν σκεπτόμενον. Des.: τὸν πάντων αὐθεντοῦντα ἐν τῇ τέχνῃ καὶ μηδὲν κτώμενον; h. (fols. 157v [l. 13]-159r [l. 4]) ⟨ps.-⟩Syrus, Universal doctrine on weather conditions.266 Tit.: ρλδ Καθολικὴ παραγγελία περὶ καταστημάτων Σύρου. Inc.: Τὴν ἀρχὴν τῆς παρατηρήσεως περὶ τοῦ ἐνιαυσιαίου καταστήματος. Des.: εἰ δὲ μετὰ καιρὸν ὄψιμον; i. (fols. 159r [l. 11]-160r [l. 11] Julianus of Laodicea, Fragmenta.267 Tit.: ρλε Περὶ ἀγορασμοῦ Ἰουλιανοῦ. Inc.: Περὶ δὲ ἀγορασμοῦ σκέπτου οὕτως. Des.: ζήτει ἐν τῷ τοῦ Ἰουλιανοῦ βιβλίῳ;268 19. (fols. 161r-v) Table of contents;269 [W2] 20. (fols. 162r-218v) ⟨ps.-⟩Heliodorus, In Paulum Alexandrinum Commentarium.270 Tit.: α Εἰς τὸν Παῦλον. Inc.: Τὸ ἑξάγωνον σχῆμα, ἀγαθόν ἐστιν. Des.: ἀστρολόγος Παῦλος μ’ ἐδιδάξατο τῇ δ’ ἐνὶ βίβλῳ; 21. (fol. 219r [l. 1-18]) al-Qabīṣī, Book of the introduction to the craft of astrology.271 Inc.: μα Λέγει ὁ Καπίσης ἐν τῷ δ βιβλίῳ τῆς πρὸς τὴν ἀγρονομίαν (sic). Des.: γίνεται ἡ σύνοδος τοῦ Κρόνου καὶ Διός; 22. (fols. 219r [l. 18]-226v [l. 6]) Anon., On abundance and shortage of goods:272 a. (fols. 219r [l. 18]-222r [l. 5]; 222r [l. 21]-226v [l. 6]) Tit.: μβ Περὶ εὐθηνίας εἰδῶν καὶ κνιπείας ἀπὸ Σαρακηνικοῦ βιβλίου μέθοδοι αὗται μετεγράφησαν. Inc.: Βλέπε τὴν Σελήνην καὶ τὸν Ἥλιον. Des.: ἀπὸ δὲ τοῦ τ[α]πεινώματος ἕως τοῦ ὑψώματος, εὐθηνίαν; b. (fol. 222r [l. 6-20]) ⟨ps.-⟩Dorotheus, Carmen astrologicum.273 Tit.: μζ Ἀπὸ τοῦ γου βιβλίου τοῦ Δωροθέου εἰς τὸ ιϛον κεφάλαιον γράφεται οὕτως. Inc.: Ἴδε εἰς τὴν ἐναλλαγὴν τοῦ χρόνου τοὺς ἀστέρας; Des.: δηλοῖ κνιπείαν καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα εὐθηνίαν; 23. (fols. 226v [l. 7]-227r) Anon., On how the universal Ascendant of the year is found.274 Tit.: Δεῖ εἰδέναι ὡς εὑρίσκεται οὕτως ὁ καθολικὸς τοῦ χρόνου ὡροσκόπος. Inc.: Μηνὶ Μαρτίῳ ιδ ἡμέρᾳ. Des.: λοιπαὶ ὧραι τῆς νυκτὸς […].275

  • 276 On the Greek manuscripts of Ogier Ghislain de Busbecq, see Gastgeber 2020, p. 145-181.
  • 277 Lambeck’s description says: «Codex manuscriptus Philosophicus Grecus est chartaceus pervetustus, pr (...)

56History of the manuscript. The manuscript, written between 1111 and 1169 in Constantinople, has been annotated there in 1241 by Ca. It is attested in the same city in the 1370s/1380s, when a large part of it was copied by Isaac Argyrus into G. A note on fol. 1r mentions the name of Demetrius Boullotes, who lived in Constantinople in the first quarter of the 15th century. Later bought by Ogier Ghislain de Busbecq (1554-1562) in the same city (autograph ex libris on fols. 3r, 228, now attached to fol. 227), the manuscript entered the collection of the Library of Vienna when he was appointed librarian.276 The stamps of the K.K. Hofbibliothek are found on the modern table of contents and on fols. 2r, 226v. The codex was in bad condition (incomplete the beginning and the ending, and without several quires) already in 1679, as witnessed by P. Lambeck.277 A note by the latter, attesting the old shelf mark «n° 134», dating probably to the years 1662-1679, is on fol. 2r. The beginning of the manuscript was already missing in the mid 15th century, since the possession note by Ogier Ghislain de Busbecq is on fol. 3r. The codex has been restored twice: in 1754, by Gerhard van Swieten (1754), as is clear from the current binding; in March 1916, see fol. 1r: «Der Codex wurde ausgebessert, und die vier ersten und letzten lagen nur geheftet im März 1916»; fol. 227v: «Fol. 1 fehlte schon vor der Restaurierung der Handschrift», «Dieses Blatt mit diesem Provenienzvermerk war schon vor der Restaurierung der Codex in dieser Weise an den Rest von fol. 227 angeklebt». The fragment of fol. 227 is now wrongly bound.

57Reproductions. https://onb.digital/​result/​1182CE33

58Catalogues. Lambeck 1679, p. 255; Nessel 1690, IV, p. 70-71; CCAG, VI, p. 16-28; Hunger 1961, p. 226-227.

59Studies. Usener 1876, p. 21; Boll 1899a, p. 84; Robbins 1940, p. xviii; Boer 1962, p. vii, x-xi, xiii; Pingree 1973, p. xvi-xvii; Pingree 1974, p. xxiii; Pingree 1976, p. xviii, 222; Pingree 1986, p. xv, xxi; Radici Colace 1988, p. 31; Pingree 1997, p. 64-66, 71; Hübner 1998, p. xvii-xviii, xxv; Pingree 2001, p. 21; Mavroudi 2002, p. 398; Pingree 2004, p. 371-374; Vuillemin-Diem – Steel 2015, p. 51, 58; Tihon 2017, p. 336; Gastgeber 2020, p. 172; Caudano 2021, p. 46, 51; Farina 2022a, p. 220, 239, 244, 246; Farina 2022b, p. 233-234, 240, 249; László 2022, p. 126-127, 235-237, 247, 253-256, 263.

Appendix 2278

  • 278 Whenever the correspondence between G and W is not indicated in the table, there is perfect correla (...)
  • 279 Omission of the reference to the “book of Julianus”.
  • 280 Omission of the reference to the “black book”.
  • 281 Omission of the reference to “Patriarch Photius”.
  • 282 Omission of the reference to “Dorotheus”.
G W

⟨ps.-⟩Heliod., In Paul. Alex. Comm.

1r-24v, 33r-39r

162r-218v

Theoph., Apotel.

48v-53v (l. 15) (= W, 58v [l. 4]-72v [l. 11]); 59v (l. 20)-60v (l. 19) (= W, 56r [l. 13]-58v [l. 19]); 74r (l. 3)-75r (l. 1) (= W, 31r [l. 3]-33v [l. 11])

25r (l. 16)-73r (l. 3)

Anon., Astr. chapters

53v (l. 16)-56r (= W, 73r [l. 3]-79r [l. 15]; 79r [l. 19]-79v); 56v (l. 1-36) (= W, 80v [l. 12]-82r [l. 18])

73r (l. 3)-83v (l. 5)

Theoph., De in. var.

56v (l. 36)-58v (l. 16) (= W, 85v [l. 5-15]; 87r [l. 10]-88r [l. 1]; 101r [l. 5]-104v [l. 12]; 105r [l. 7]-105v [l. 2]; 106r [l. 14]-106v [l. 9]); 60v (l. 19)-61r (l. 12) (= W, 109v [l. 16]-110r [l. 4]; 110v [l. 2]-111r [l. 6]; 111v [l. 14]-112r [l. 2]; 114r [l. 16]-114v [l. 3])

83v (l. 6)-106v (l. 9); 109v (l. 15)-114v (l. 3)

Scholium

58v (l. 17-22)

106v (l. 9)-107r (l. 3)

Julian., Frag.

58v (l. 23)-59r (l. 27) (= W, 107r [l. 4]-108v [l. 10]); 73v (l. 20)-74r (l. 3) (= W, 159r [l. 11]-160r [l. 11])279

107r (l. 4)-108v (l. 10); 159r (l. 11)-160r (l. 11)

Heph., Ep.2

59r (l. 27)-v (l. 19); 64v (l. 7-10); 68r (l. 32)-68v (l. 9)

108v (l. 11)-109v (l. 15); 125v (l. 1-8); 140r-v (l. 13)

Anon., Astr. chapter and scholium

61r (l. 13)-61v

114v (l. 4)-117r (l. 10)280

ʾAbū Maʿšar, ⟨Astr. chapters

62r-63r (l. 9)

117r (l. 11)-120r

Heph., Apotel.

63r (l. 9-25); 66v (l. 16-20); 71r (l. 9-31)

120v-121r (l. 10); 132v (l. 2-9); 150v (l. 6)-151v (l. 7)

Anon., Astr. chapters

63r (l. 25)-63v (l. 12) (= W, 121r [l. 10-13]; 121v [l. 9]-122v [l. 10])281

121r (l. 10)-122v (l. 10)

Anon., Astr. chapters with diagram

64r (l. 11)-64v (l. 6) (= W, 123r [l. 19]-125v [l. 1]); 64v (l. 11)-65r (l. 11) (= W, 127r [l. 14]);282 65v (l. 8-26) (= W, 129v [l. 5-12]; 129r [l. 6]-129v [l. 5]); 65v (l. 33)-66v (l. 16) (= W, 130r [l. 3]-132v [l. 2]); 66v (l. 20)-67v (l. 36) (= W, 132v [l. 9]-137r [l. 5]); 68v (l. 10-28) (= W, 140v [l. 14]-141v [l. 12]); 68v (l. 36)-69r (l. 36) (= W, 142v [l. 13]-143v [l. 18]); 69v (l. 1)-71r (l. 8) (= W, 145r [l. 11]-150v [l. 5]); 71r (l. 31)-71v (l. 22) (= W, 151v [l. 7]-152v [l. 15]); 72v (l. 30)-73r (l. 24) (= W, 156r [l. 14]-157v [l. 13]); 73v (l. 16-20) (= W, 159r [l. 5-10])

122v (l. 10)-160v

Heliod. (?), In Ptol. Ap.

144r-206v; 25r-31v

121r (l. 18)-121v (l. 9) [excerpt]

Max., Paraph.1

65r (l. 11)-v (l. 8); 65v (l. 26-32); 67v (l. 36)-68r (l. 32)

127r (l. 17)-129r (l. 5); 129v (l. 12)-130r (l. 2); 137r (l. 5)-139r (l. 6); 139v (l. 14)-140r (l. 1)

Hermes, Meth. mystica

71v (l. 22)-72v (l. 30)

152v (l. 15)-156r (l. 14)

⟨ps.-⟩Syrus, Universal doctrine

73r (l. 25)-73v (l. 16)

157v (l. 13)-159r (l. 4)

Haut de page

Bibliographie

Libraries

BA = Biblioteca Angelica, Rome.

BAN = Российская Академия Наук. Библиотека, St. Petersburg.

BAV = Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vatican City.

BML = Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Florence.

BN = Biblioteca Nazionale Vittorio Emanuele III, Naples.

BnF = Bibliothèque nationale de France, Paris.

BNM = Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, Venice.

ÖNB = Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna.

Manuscripts

A = Roma, Biblioteca Angelica, gr. 29 [diktyon 55936].

G = Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, grec 2507 [diktyon 52139].

I = Firenze, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Plut. 28.13 [diktyon 16194].

L = Firenze, Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Plut. 28.34 [diktyon 16215].

M = Venezia, Biblioteca Nazionale Marciana, Marc. gr. Z. 334 (coll. 553) [diktyon 69805].

P = Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, grec 1670 [diktyon 51293].

Pa = Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, supplément grec 1241 [diktyon 53905].

Pe = St. Petersburg, BAN, иностранных рукописей O N° 128 (= Granstrem 621) [diktyon 56834].

T = Città del Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. gr. 212 [diktyon 66843].

V = Città del Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. gr. 1056 [diktyon 67687].

Va = Città del Vaticano, Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, Vat. gr. 1038 [diktyon 67669].

W = Wien, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, phil. gr. 115 [diktyon 71229].

Primary sources

Boer 1958 = E. Boer (ed.), Paulus Alexandrinus, ΕΙΣΑΓΩΓΙΚΑ, Leipzig, 1958.

Boer 1962 = E. Boer (ed.), Heliodori ut dicitur in Paulum Alexandrinum Commentarium, Leipzig, 1962.

Boll – Boer [1940] 1957 = F. Boll, E. Boer (eds), Claudii Ptolemaei Opera quae exstant omnia. Volumen III 1: ΑΠΟΤΕΛΕΣΜΑΤΙΚΑ, Leipzig, [1940] 1957.

Burnett – Yamamoto – Yano 2004 = Ch. Burnett, K. Yamamoto, M. Yano (eds), Al-Qabīṣī (Alcabitius), The Introduction to astrology. Editions of the Arabic and Latin texts and a English translation, London-Turin, 2004.

de Boor 1883 = C. de Boor (ed.), Theophanis Chronographia, Leipzig, 1883.

Hübner 1998 = W. Hübner (ed.), Claudii Ptolemaei Opera quae exstant omnia. Volumen III 1: ΑΠΟΤΕΛΕΣΜΑΤΙΚΑ, post F. Boll et Æ. Boer secundis curis, Stuttgart-Leipzig, 1998.

Karaǧī 1940 = ʾAbū Bakr al-Karaǧī, Kitāb ʾanbāṭ al-miyāh al-ḫafiyyah, Ḥaydarābād, 1359 [Treatise on the extraction of hidden waters].

Kühn 1830 = C.G. Kühn (ed.), Claudii Galeni Opera omnia, XIX, Leipzig, 1830.

Paton 1918 = W.R. Paton (ed.), The Greek Anthology with an English translation, V, London-New York, 1918.

Pingree 1968 = D. Pingree (ed.), Albumasaris De revolutionibus nativitatum, Leipzig, 1968.

Pingree 1973 = D. Pingree (ed.), Hephaestionis Thebani Apotelesmaticorum libri tres, Leipzig, 1973.

Pingree 1974 = D. Pingree (ed.), Hephaestionis Thebani Apotelesmaticorum epitomae quattuor, Leipzig, 1974.

Pingree 1976 = D. Pingree (ed.), Dorothei Sidonii Carmen astrologicum. Interpretationem Arabicam in linguam Anglicam versam una cum Dorothei fragmentis et Graecis et Latinis, Leipzig, 1976.

Pingree 1986 = D. Pingree (ed.), Vettii Valentis Antiocheni Anthologiarum libri novem, Leipzig, 1986.

Radici Colace 1988 = P. Radici Colace, Le parafrasi bizantine del Περὶ Καταρχῶν di Massimo, Messina, 1988.

Robbins 1940 = F.E. Robbins (ed.), Ptolemy Tetrabiblos: edited and translated into English, Cambridge, MA, 1940.

Rovati 2018 = E. Rovati, Die «Iatromathematika» des Hermes Trismegistos: Einleitung, Edition, Übersetzung, in Technai: an international journal for ancient science and technology, 9, 2018, p. 9-132.

Stegemann 1939 = V. Stegemann, Die Fragmente des Dorotheos von Sidon, Heidelberg, 1939.

Vuillemin-Diem – Steel 2015 = G. Vuillemin-Diem, C. Steel (eds), Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos in the translation of William of Moerbeke. Claudii Ptolemaei Liber iudicialium, with the assistance of P. De Leemans, Leuven, 2015.

Wolf 1559 = H. Wolf, In Claudii Ptolemaei Quadripartitum enarrator ignoti nominis, quem tamen Proclum fuisse quidam existimant, Basileae ex officina Petriana, 1559.

Yamamoto – Burnett 2019 = K. Yamamoto, Ch. Burnett (eds), The Great introduction to astrology by Abū Maʿšar, Leiden-Boston, 2019.

Yano 1997 = M. Yano (ed.), Kūšyār ibn Labbān’s Introduction to astrology, Tokyo, 1997.

Secondary sources

Acerbi – Di Mambro 2023 = F. Acerbi, S. Di Mambro, Barlaam’s refutation of the chapters added to Ptolemy’s Harmonics. A critical edition, in Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 73, 2023, p. 1-56.

Acerbi – Gioffreda 2019 = F. Acerbi, A. Gioffreda, Manoscritti scientifici della prima età paleologa in scrittura arcaizzante, in Scripta, 12, 2019, p. 9-52.

Acerbi – Trizio 2022 = F. Acerbi, M. Trizio, Uprooting Byzantium. Ninth-century Byzantine books and the Graeco-Arabic translation movement, in Scandinavian Journal of Byzantine and Modern Greek studies, 8, 2022, p. 105-154.

Acerbi 2019 = F. Acerbi, Byzantine Rechenbücher: an overview with an edition of Anonymi J and L, in Jahrbuch der Österreichischen Byzantinistik, 69, 2019, p. 1-57.

Acerbi 2020 = F. Acerbi, Topographie du Vat. gr. 1594, in D. Bianconi, F. Ronconi (eds), La « collection philosophique » face à l’histoire : péripéties et tradition, Spoleto, 2020, p. 239-321.

Acerbi 2021 = F. Acerbi, Struttura e concezione del vademecum computazionale Par. gr. 1670, in Segno e Testo, 19, 2021, p. 167-255.

Acerbi 2023 = F. Acerbi, Editing technical texts: lessons from Greek and Byzantine textual traditions, in The Vatican Library review, 2, 2023, p. 121-144.

Alberti 1979 = G.B. Alberti, Problemi di critica testuale, Florence, 1979.

Andréadès 1924 = A. Andréadès, De la monnaie et de la puissance d’achat des métaux précieux dans l’Empire byzantin, in Byzantion : revue internationale des études byzantines, 1, 1924, p. 75-115.

Bardi 2021 = A. Bardi, Hybrid knowledge and the historiography of science: rethinking the history of astronomy between second-century CE Alexandria, ninth-century Baghdad, and fourteenth-century Constantinople, in Transversal: International journal for the historiography of science, 11, 2021, p. 1-13.

Bardi 2023 = A. Bardi, The relationships between scientific and theological discourses at the crossroads between medieval and early modern times and the historiography of science: a case study from fourteenth-century Byzantium, in Transversal: International journal for the historiography of science, 15, 2023, p. 1-15.

Bezza 2002 = G. Bezza, Il trattato sulle natività di Eleuterio Zebeleno di Elis, in MHNH. Revista internacional de investigación sobre magia y astrología antiguas, 2, 2002, p. 257-300.

Bezza 2005 = G. Bezza, Per un lessico astrologico: glossario dei termini tecnici dell’“Isagoge” di Paolo d’Alessandria, in MHNH. Revista internacional de investigación sobre magia y astrología antiguas, 5, 2005, p. 277-305.

Bianconi 2010 = D. Bianconi, Età comnena e cultura scritta. Materiali e considerazioni alle origini di una ricerca, in A. Bravo García, I. Pérez Martín (eds), Proceedings of the seventh international colloquium of Greek palaeography, Madrid-Salamanca, 15-20 September 2008, Turnhout, 2010, p. 75-96.

Biot 1896 = J.-B. Biot, Mémoire sur divers points d’astronomie ancienne, et en particulier sur la période Sothiaque comprenant 1460 années juliennes, Paris, 1896.

Boll 1899a = F. Boll, Beiträge zur Überlieferungsgeschichte der griechischen Astrologie und Astronomie, in Sitzungsberichte der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-Philologische und Historische Klasse, 1-3, 1899, p. 77-140.

Boll 1899b = F. Boll, Die Verbannung des Photios, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 8/1, 1899, p. 158.

Boll 1912 = F. Boll, Eine arabisch-byzantinische Quelle des Dialogs Hermippos, in Sitzungsberichte der Heidelberger Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philosophisch-historische Klasse, 18, 1912, p. 3-28.

Bosworth 1993 = C. E. Bosworth, s.v. al-Muʿtaṣim Bi’llāh, in The encyclopedia of Islam: new edition, vol. 7, 1993, p. 776.

Bouché-Leclerq 1899 = A. Bouché-Leclerq, L’astrologie grecque, Paris, 1899.

Caballero Sánchez 2013a = R. Caballero Sánchez, Historia del texto del Comentario anónimo al Tetrabiblos de Tolomeo, in MHNH. Revista internacional de investigación sobre magia y astrología antiguas, 13, 2013, p. 77-198.

Caballero Sánchez 2013b = R. Caballero Sánchez, El Comentario anónimo al Tetrabiblos de Tolomeo. Edición crítica y traducción castellana de los escolios metodológicos del libro I (in Ptol. Tetr. 1.1.1-1.3.1), in MHNH. Revista internacional de investigación sobre magia y astrología antiguas, 13, 2013, p. 221-258.

Caballero Sánchez 2018 = R. Caballero Sánchez, Sobre los signos que indican los deseos amorosos: problemas de autoría en torno a un texto astrológico transmitido en el Comentario Anónimo al Tetrabiblos de Tolomeo, in MINERVA. Revista de filología clásica, 31, 2018, p. 133-158.

Caballero Sánchez 2020 = R. Caballero Sánchez, Heliodoro de Alejandría y el Comentario Anónimo al Tetrabiblos de Tolomeo, in Humanitas. Revista do Instituto de estudos clássicos, 76, 2020, p. 33-56.

Caballero Sánchez 2021 = R. Caballero Sánchez, On the chronology of the Anonymous Commentary to Ptolemy’s Tetrabiblos: analysis of the astronomical evidence, in Journal for the history of astronomy, 52, 2021, p. 442-461.

Caballero Sánchez 2022 = R. Caballero Sánchez, The horoscopes of the Anonymous Commentary on Ptolemy’s ‘Tetrabiblos’, in Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes, 85, 2022, p. 1-23.

Caluori 2018 = D. Caluori, Olympiodor, §161, in Ch. Riedweg, Ch. Horn, D. Wyrwa (eds), Philosophie der Kaiserzeit und der Spätantike, Basel, 2018, p. 2051-2059.

Canart 1970 = P. Canart, Codices Vaticani Graeci. Codices 1745-1962. Tomus I, Codicum enarrationes, Vatican City, 1970.

Caudano 2012 = A.L. Caudano, An astrological handbook from the reign of Manuel I Komnenos, in Almagest, 3/2, 2012, p. 47-65.

Caudano 2021 = A.L. Caudano, Astrological practices in the handbooks of the Komnenoi period: between tradition and innovations, in M. Grünbart (ed.), Unterstützung bei herrscherlichem Entscheiden. Experten und ihr Wissen in transkultureller und komparativer Perspektive, Göttingen, 2021, p. 40-55.

Cavallo 2000 = G. Cavallo, Scritture informali, cambio grafico e pratiche librarie a Bisanzio tra i secoli XI e XII, in G. Prato (ed.), I manoscritti greci tra riflessione e dibattito, Atti del V Colloquio Internazionale di Paleografia greca, Cremona, 4-10 ottobre 1998, Florence, 2000, I, p. 219-238, III, p. 149-178.

CCAG = F. Boll et al., Catalogus codicum astrologorum graecorum, 12 vols, Brussels, 1898-1953.

Christides 1969 = V. Christides, Arabs as “barbaroi”, before the rise of Islam, in Balkan Studies, 10, 1969, p. 315-324.

Christides 1972 = V. Christides, The names ἄραβες, σαρακηνοί, etc. and their false byzantine etymologies, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 65/2, 1972, p. 329-333.

Cronier – Guardasole – Pietrobelli 2023 = M. Cronier, A. Guardasole, A. Pietrobelli (eds), De Bagdad à Constantinople : le transfert des savoirs médicaux (XIe-XIVs.), Actes du colloque international de Reims, 24-25 mai 2018, Leuven-Paris-Bristol, CT, 2023.

Csorba – Veszprémy 2020 [2022] = Z. Csorba, M. Veszprémy, The dating of Albumasar in Sadan, in MHNH. Revista internacional de investigación sobre magia y astrología antiguas, 20, 2020 [2022], p. 79-92.

De Montfaucon 1708 = B. de Montfaucon, Palaeographia Graeca, Paris, 1708.

Denningmann 2005 = S. Denningmann, Die astrologische Lehre der Doryphorie. Eine soziomorphe Metapher in der antiken Planetenastrologie, Munich, 2005.

Denningmann 2007 = S. Denningmann, The ambiguous terms ἑῴα and ἑσπερία, ἀνατολή, and ἑῴα and ἑσπερία δύσις, in Culture and Cosmos, 11/1-2, 2007, p. 189-210.

Dorandi 2000 = T. Dorandi, Review to Hübner 1998, in The Classical Review, n.s. 50/1, 2000, p. 30-32.

Dunlop 1971 = D.M. Dunlop, The Mudhākarāt fī ‘ilm an-nujūm (Dialogues on astrology) attributed to Abū Ma‘shar al-Balkhī (Albumasar), in C.E. Bosworth (ed.), Iran and Islam. In memory of the late Vladimir Minorsky, Edinburgh, 1971, p. 229-246.

Dykes – Gramaglia 2017 = B. Dykes, E. Gramaglia (eds), Astrological Works of Theophilus of Edessa, Minneapolis, MN, 2017.

Farina 2022a = L. Farina, A review of John Abramios’ profile, in Byzantion : revue internationale des études byzantines, 92, 2022, p. 205-249.

Farina 2022b = L. Farina, The Greek fragments of the works of Māšāʾallāh ibn Aṯarī, in Mediterranea. International journal on the transfer of knowledge, 7, 2022, p. 225-279.

Farina 2023 = L. Farina, Staring at the stars in Palaiologan Constantinople: the case of the Methodus inveniendi horoscopi by Demetrios Chloros, in La Parola del passato, 68/1, 2023, p. 81-116.

Federici Vescovini 1998 = G. Federici Vescovini, La versio latina degli “Excerpta de Secretis Albumasar di Sadan”: una edizione, in Archives d’histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Âge, 65, 1998, p. 273-330.

Frolow 1949 = A. Frolow, Les noms des monnaies dans le Typicon du Pantocrator, in Byzantinoslavica, 10, 1949, p. 241-253.

Gacek 2001 = A. Gacek, The Arabic manuscript tradition: a glossary of technical terms and bibliography, Leiden, 2001.

Gastgeber 2020 = Ch. Gastgeber, Ogier Ghislain de Busbecq und seine griechischen Handschriften, in A. Binggeli, M. Cassin, M. Detoraki (eds), Bibliothèques grecques dans l’Empire ottoman, Turnhout, 2020, p. 145-181.

Gioffreda 2020 = A. Gioffreda, Tra i libri di Isacco Argiro, Berlin-Boston, 2020.

Glynias – Chitwood – Pahlitzsch 2022 = J. Glynias, Z. Chitwood, J. Pahlitzsch, Laying a framework for Arabo-Greek studies: the translation of Arabic scientific texts into Greek between the ninth and fifteenth Centuries, in Mediterranea. International journal on the transfer of knowledge, 7, 2022, p. 137-142.

Glynias 2022 = J. Glynias, Reconstructing middle Byzantine Arabo-Greek astrology from later Greek manuscripts, in Mediterranea. International journal on the transfer of knowledge, 7, 2022, p. 183-224.

Greenbaum – Ross 2010 = D.G. Greenbaum, M.T. Ross, The role of Egypt in the development of the horoscope, in L. Bareš, F. Coppens, K. Smoláriková (eds), Egypt in transition: social and religious development of Egypt in the first millennium BCE, Proceedings of an international conference, Prague, September 1-4, 2009, Prague, 2010, p. 146-182.

Greenbaum 2012 = D.G. Greenbaum, Paulus of Alexandria, in R.S. Bagnall, K. Brodersen, C.B. Champion, A. Erskine, S.R. Huebner (eds), The encyclopaedia of ancient history, IX, Malden, MA, 2012, p. 5111-5112.

Gutas 1998 = D. Gutas, Greek thought, Arabic culture: the Graeco-Arabic translation movement in Baghdad and early ‘Abbāsid society (2nd-4th/8th-10th centuries), London, 1998.

Gutas 2012 = D. Gutas, Arabic into Byzantine Greek: Introducing a survey of the translations, in A. Speer, Ph. Steinkrüger (eds), Knotenpunkt Byzanz: Wissensformen und kulturelle Wechselbeziehungen, Berlin-Boston, 2012, p. 246-262.

Heilen 2010a = S. Heilen, Problems in translating Ancient Greek astrological texts, in A. Imhausen, T. Pommerening (eds), Writings of early scholars in the Ancient Near East, Egypt, Rome, and Greece, Berlin-New York, 2010, p. 299-329.

Heilen 2010b = S. Heilen, Ptolemy’s doctrine of the terms and its reception, in A. Jones (ed.) Ptolemy in perspective: use and criticism of his work from antiquity to the nineteenth century, Dordrecht-Heidelberg-London, 2010, p. 45-93.

Heilen 2015 = S. Heilen, Hadriani genitura: die astrologischen Fragmente des Antigonos von Nikaia, Berlin-Boston, 2015.

Heilen 2016 = S. Heilen, Translating Greco-Roman astrological texts: the horoscope of Hadrian by Antigonus of Nicaea, in A. Imhausen, T. Pommerening (eds), Translating writings of early scholars in the ancient Near East, Egypt, Greece and Rome: methodological aspects with examples, Berlin-Boston, 2016, p. 507-569.

Heilen 2020 = S. Heilen, Konjunktionsprognostik in der frühen Neuzeit, Band 1. Die Antichrist-Prognose des Johannes von Lübeck (1474) zur Saturn-Jupiter Konjunktion von 1504 und ihre frühneuzeitliche Rezeption, Baden-Baden, 2020.

Hendy 1969 = M.F. Hendy, Coinage and money in the Byzantine empire 1081-1261, Washington, DC, 1969.

Honigmann 1929 = E. Honigmann, Die sieben Klimata und die ΠΟΛΕΙΣ ΕΠΙΣΗΜΟΙ: Eine Untersuchung zur Geschichte der Geographie und Astrologie im Altertum und Mittelalter, Heidelberg, 1929.

Hoyland 2011 = R.G. Hoyland (ed.), Theophilus of Edessa’s Chronicle and the circulation of historical knowledge in Late Antiquity and early Islam, Liverpool, 2011.

Hübner 1982 = W. Hübner, Die Eigenschaften der Tierkreiszeichen in der Antike. Ihre Darstellung und Verwendung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Manilius, Wiesbaden, 1982.

Hübner 1989 = W. Hübner, Die Begriffe “Astrologie” und “Astronomie” in der Antike. Wortgeschichte und Wissenschaftssystematik, mit einer Hypothese zum Terminus “Quadrivium”, Wiesbaden, 1989.

Hübner 1995 = W. Hübner, Die Dodecatropos des Manilius, Stuttgart, 1995.

Hunger 1961 = H. Hunger, Katalog der griechischen Handschriften der Österreichischen Nationalbibliothek 1: codices historici, codices philosophici et philologici, Vienna, 1961.

Jones 1987 = A. Jones, An eleventh-century manual of Arabo-Byzantine astronomy, Amsterdam, 1987. 

Jürss 1966 = F. Jürss, Johannes Katrarios und der Dialog Hermippos oder über die Astrologie, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 59/2, 1966, p. 275-284.

Kaldellis 2022 = A. Kaldellis, Translations into Greek in the Byzantine period, in D. Gutas, Why translate science? Documents from antiquity to the sixteenth century in the historical West (Bactria to the Atlantic), Leiden, 2022, p. 397-444.

Karabaceck 1887 = J. von Karabaceck, Das arabische Papier, in Mitteilungen aus der Sammlung der Papyrus Erzherzog Rainer, Vienna, 1887, p. 87-178.

Kunitzsch 1964 = P. Kunitzsch, Das Fixsternverzeichnis in der “Persischen Syntaxis” des Georgios Chrysokokkes, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 57/2, 1964, p. 382-411.

Ladynin 2019 = И. А Ладынин, Еще раз о летосчислении “от Менофриса” (К истории научной проблемы и поиску ее решения) [Once again on the time-reckoning “after Menophris” (A history of a scholarly problem and a search of its solution)], in Вестник древней истории, 79/2, 2019, p. 245-265.

Lambeck 1679 = P. Lambeck, Commentariorum de augustissima Bibliotheca Caesarea Vindobonensi liber septimus, Vienna, 1679.

László 2020 = L. László, Julianus of Laodicea and his astrological fragments, in Mnemosyne, 75/2, 2020, p. 1-20.

László 2022 = L. László, The inceptions of the Emperor Zeno’s anonymous astrologer, PhD Thesis, Budapest, 2022.

Lefort et al. 2019 = J. Lefort (eds), Actes de Vatopédi, III, de 1377 à 1500, Paris-Leuven, 2019.

Lepsius 1858 = C.R. Lepsius, Königsbuch der alten Ägypter, Berlin, 1858.

Lightfoot 2021 = J.L. Lightfoot, Pseudo-Manetho, Apotelesmatica. Books two, three, and six: edited with introduction, translation, and commentary, Oxford, 2021.

Lightfoot 2023 = J.L. Lightfoot, Pseudo-Manetho, Apotelesmatica. Books four, one, and five: edited with introduction, translation, and commentary, Oxford, 2023.

LSJ = H.G. Liddell, R. Scott, H.S. Jones, Greek-English lexicon, Oxford, 2011.

Łukaszewicz 1995 = A. Łukaszewicz, Menophres reconsidered, in Journal of Juristic Papyrology, 25, 1995, p. 99-108.

Magdalino 2003 = P. Magdalino, The porphyrogenita and the astrologers, a commentary on Alexiad VI.7.1-7, in Ch. Dendrinos et al. (eds), Porphyrogenita: essays on the history and literature of Byzantium and the Latin East in honour of Julian Chrysostomides, Aldershot, 2003, p. 15-31.

Magdalino 2006 = P. Magdalino, L’orthodoxie des astrologues : la science entre le dogme et la divination à Byzance (VIIe-XIVe siècle), Paris, 2006.

Magdalino 2021 = P. Magdalino, Astrology at the court of Manuel I Komnenos (1143-1180), in M. Grünbart (ed.), Unterstützung bei herrscherlichem Entscheiden. Experten und ihr Wissen in transkultureller und komparativer Perspektive, Göttingen, 2021, p. 160-170.

Manfredi – Potenza 2022 = A. Manfredi, F. Potenza, I codici greci di Niccolò V: edizione dell’inventario del 1455 e identificazione dei manoscritti, Vatican City, 2022.

Martelli 2016 = M. Martelli, s.v. Stéphanos, in R. Goulet (ed.), Dictionnaire des philosophes antiques, VI, Paris, 2016, p. 557-563.

Mavroudi 2002 = M. Mavroudi, A Byzantine book on dream interpretation. The Oneirocriticon of Achmet and its Arabic sources, Leiden-Boston-Köln, 2002.

Mavroudi 2006 = M. Mavroudi, Occult science and society in Byzantium: consideration for future research, in P. Magdalino, M. Mavroudi (eds), The Occult Sciences in Byzantium, Geneva, 2006, p. 39-95.

Mavroudi 2019 [2020] = M. Mavroudi, Faith and community: their deployment in the modern study of Byzantino-Arabica, in P. Guran, D.A. Michelson (eds), Faith and community around the Mediterranean: In honor of Peter R.L. Brown, Bucharest-Heidelberg, 2019 [2020], p. 239-250.

Mavroudi 2023 = M. Mavroudi, Byzantine translations from Arabic into Greek: old and new historiography in confluence and in conflict, in Journal of Late Antique, Islamic and Byzantine Studies, 2/1-2, 2023, p. 215-288.

Mazzucchi 1997 = C.M. Mazzucchi, Per una punteggiatura non anacronistica, e più efficace, dei testi greci, in Bollettina della Badia Greca di Grottaferrata, n.s., 51, 1997, p. 129-143.

Mercati 1924 = G. Mercati, Su Giovanni Catrari, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 24/2, 1924, p. 300-305.

Mercati 1926 = G. Mercati, Scritti d’Isidoro, il cardinale ruteno, e codici a lui appartenuti che si conservano nella Biblioteca apostolica vaticana, Vatican City, 1926.

Miguet 2024 = Th. Miguet, Viatique du voyageur d’Ibn al-Ǧazzār. Histoire du texte grec, de la Sicile à Constantinople, Paris, 2024.

Mira Grob 2010 = E. Mira Grob, Documentary Arabic private and business letters on papyrus: form and function, content and context, Berlin-Boston, 2010.

MM = M. Miklosich, J. Müller, Acta et diplomata graeca medii aevi sacra et profana, Vienna, 1860-1890.

Morrisson 1979 = C. Morrisson, La logarikè : réforme monétaire et réforme fiscale sous Alexis Ier Comnène, in Travaux et mémoires, 7, 1979, p. 419-464.

Nessel 1690 = D. Nessel, Breviarium et supplementum commentariorum Lambecianorum, sive catalogus, aut recensio specialis omnium codd. mss. graecorum, necnon linguarum orientalium biblioth. Caesareae Vindobonensis, Vienna, 1690.

Neugebauer – Van Hoesen 1959 [1987] = O. Neugebauer, H.B. Van Hoesen, Greek Horoscopes, Philadelphia, 1959 [1987].

Neugebauer 1960 = O. Neugebauer, Studies in Byzantine astronomical terminology, in Transactions of the American Philosophical Society, 50/2, 1960, p. 1-45.

Neugebauer 1962 = O. Neugebauer, Interpretationes, in Boer 1962, p. 145-149.

Noret 1995 = J. Noret, Notes de ponctuation et d’accentuation byzantines, in Byzantion. Revue internationale des études byzantines, 65, 1995, p. 69-88.

Noret 2014 = J. Noret, L’accentuation byzantine : en quoi et pourquoi elle diffère de l’accentuation « savante » actuelle, parfois absurde, in M. Hinterberger (ed.), The language of Byzantine literature, Turnhout, 2014, p. 96-146.

Olivieri 1898 = A. Olivieri, Frammenti dell’“Astrologia” di Efestione Tebano nel cod. Laurenziano 28, 34, in Studi italiani di filologia classica, 6, 1898, p. 1-27.

Opsomer 2010 = J. Opsomer, Olympiodorus, in L.P. Gerson, The Cambridge history of philosophy in Late Antiquity, 2, Cambridge, 2010, p. 697-710.

Pérez Martín 2015 = I. Pérez Martín, The transmission of Michael Psellos’ writings on Meteorologica, in J. Signes Codoñer, I. Pérez Martín (eds), Textual transmission in Byzantium: between textual criticism and Quellenforschung, Turnhout, 2015, p. 291-311.

Petersen 2013 = L.I.R. Petersen, Siege warfare and military organization in the successor states (400-800 AD): Byzantium, the West and Islam, Leiden-Boston, 2013.

Pingree 1977a = D. Pingree, Antiochus and Rhetorius, in Classical Philology, 72/3, 1977, p. 203-223.

Pingree 1977b = D. Pingree, The horoscope of Constantinople, in Y. Maeyama, W.G. Saltzer (eds), ΠΡΙΣΜΑΤΑ. Naturwissenschaftsgeschichtliche Studien. Festschrift für Willy Hartner, Wiesbaden, 1977, p. 305-315.

Pingree 1983 = D. Pingree, The Byzantine tradition of Vettius Valens’s “Anthologies”, in Harvard Ukranian Studies, 7, 1983 [= Okeanos: essays presented to Ihor Ševčenko on his sixtieth birthday by his colleagues and students], p. 532-541.

Pingree 1989 = D. Pingree, Classical and Byzantine astrology in Sassanian Persia, in Dumbarton Oaks Papers, 43, 1989, p. 227-239.

Pingree 1997 = D. Pingree, From astral omens to astrology: from Babylon to Bīkāner, Rome, 1997.

Pingree 2001 = D. Pingree, From Alexandria to Baghdād to Byzantium: the transmission of Astrology, in International journal of the classical tradition, 8/1, 2001, p. 6-21.

Pingree 2003 = D. Pingree, The sayings of Abū Maʿshar in Arabic, Greek and Latin, in G. Marchetti, O. Rignani, V. Sorge (eds), Ratio et superstitio: essays in honor of Graziella Federici Vescovini, Louvain-la-Neuve, 2003, p. 41-57.

Pingree 2004 = D. Pingree, The Greek fragment of al-Qabīṣī, in Burnett – Yamamoto – Yano 2004, p. 371-374.

Pingree 2006 = D. Pingree, The Byzantine translations of Māshā’llāh on interrogational astrology, in P. Magdalino, M. Mavroudi (eds), The occult sciences in Byzantium, Geneva, 2006, p. 231-243.

PLP = E. Trapp et al. (eds), Prosopographisches Lexikon der Palaiologenzeit, Vienna, 1976-1996.

Rosenthal 1958 = F. Rosenthal (ed.), Ibn Khaldūn, The Muqaddimah: an introduction to history, II, New York, 1958.

Safran 2020 = L. Safran, A prolegomenon to Byzantine diagrams, in M. Kupfer, A.S. Cohen, J.H. Chajes (eds), The visualization of knowledge in medieval and early modern Europe, Turnhout, 2020, p. 361-382.

Sahas 2021 = D.J. Sahas, ‘Saracens’ and the Syrians in the Byzantine anti-Islamic literature and before, in J. Sahas, Byzantium and Islam: collected studies on Byzantine-Muslim encounters, Leiden, 2021, p. 182-202.

Saliba 1999 = G. Saliba, Astronomy and astrology in medieval Arabic thought, in R. Rashed, J. Biard (eds), Les doctrines de la science de l’antiquité à l’âge classique, Leuven, 1999, p. 131-164.

Šangin 1926 = М. А Шангин, Греческий перевод Абӯ Ма’шара в рукописи Библиотеки Академии Наук [Une traduction grecque d’Abū Ma’ˇsar, un manuscrit de la Bibliothèque de l’Académie des Sciences], in Известия Академии наук СССР. VI серия, 20-10, 1926, p. 907-916.

Savvides 1997 = A.G.C. Savvides, Some notes on the terms Agarenoī, Ismaelītai and Sarakenoī in Byzantine sources, in Byzantion. Revue internationale des études byzantines, 67, 1997, p. 89-96.

Schilbach 1970 = E. Schilbach, Byzantinische Metrologie, Munich, 1970.

Sophoulis 2012 = P. Sophoulis, Byzantium and Bulgaria, 775-831, Leiden-Boston, 2012.

Tihon 1973 = A. Tihon, Les scolies des Tables Faciles de Ptolémée, in Bulletin de l’Institut historique Belge de Rome, 43, p. 49-110.

Tihon 1989 = A. Tihon, Sur l’identité de l’astronome Alim, in Archives internationales d’histoire des sciences, 39, 1989, p. 3-21.

Tihon 1993 = A. Tihon, L’astronomie à Byzance à l’époque iconoclaste (VIIIe-IXe siècles), in P.L. Butzer, D. Lohrmann (eds), Science in Western and Eastern civilization in Carolingian times, Basel, 1993, p. 181-203.

Tihon 2017 = A. Tihon, Premier humanisme byzantin : le témoignage des manuscrits astronomiques, in Travaux et Mémoires, 21/2, 2017, p. 325-337.

Tolsa 2019 = C. Tolsa, Astrometeorology by Syrus, in SCIAMVS. Sources and commentaries in exact sciences, 20, 2019, p. 1-30.

Toomer 1963 = G.J. Toomer, Rev. to Boer 1962, in Gnomon, 35, 1963, p. 269-272.

Toomer 1984 = G.J. Toomer, Ptolemy’s Almagest: translated and annotated. With a Foreword by O. Gingerich, London, 1984.

Usener 1876 = H. Usener, Ad historiam astronomiae symbola, Bonn, 1876.

von Lingenthal 1857 = C.E.Z. von Lingenthal, Jus Graeco-Romanum, Pars III, Novellae constitutiones, Leipzig, 1857.

Warnon 1967 = J. Warnon, Le commentaire attribué à Héliodore sur les Εἰσαγωγικά de Paul d’Alexandrie, in Recherches de philologie et de linguistique, 1, Leuven, 1967, p. 197-217.

Westerink 1971 = L.G. Westerink, Ein astrologisches Kolleg aus dem Jahre 564, in Byzantinische Zeitschrift, 64/1, 1971, p. 6-21.

Westerink 1975 = L.G. Westerink, (ed.), Mazaris’ Journey to Hades or Interviews with dead men about certain officials of the Imperial Court, Buffalo, NY, 1975.

Wolska-Conus 1989 = W. Wolska-Conus, Stéphanos d’Athènes et Stéphanos d’Alexandrie : essai d’identification et de biographie, in Revue des études byzantines, 47, 1989, p. 5-89.

Haut de page

Notes

1 Online reproductions and a preliminary analysis of the mentioned manuscripts can be found by searching Pinakes: https://pinakes.irht.cnrs.fr/ via the diktyon number.

2 Boer 1962, p. viii-xii. The authorship of this text is disputed: reasons for attributing the text to Olympiodorus and not to Heliodorus (either of the totality of the text, or of the bulk of the extant text), are given in Toomer 1963, p. 270, Warnon 1967 and Westerink 1971, p. 10-13; see, more recently, Pingree 2004, p. 371, and Greenbaum 2012. For a status quaestionis, see Opsomer 2010, p. 700-710, Heilen 2015, p. 502-503, and Caluori 2018, p. 2056. The name “Heliodorus” in W, fol. 162r, is added to the title by the copyist of the main text, in brown ink.

3 The reference edition is Hübner 1998. Previous editions include Robbins 1940, and Boll – Boer [1940] 1957. For an update of Hübner’s edition, see at least Vuillemin-Diem – Steel 2015, p. 93-129, and infra, Section 1.

4 Some chapters are published in the appendixes of the CCAG volumes, see László 2022, p. 252-257: 254-255, for an overview. David Pingree (see just below) could not carry the critical edition of Theophilus to completion. I intend to complete a study of the textual transmission and an edition of these works in a future publication. The pinakes of Theoph., Apotel. and De in. bell. are preserved in MSS Paris, BnF, supplément grec 1241 [diktyon 53905] (henceforth Pa), fols. 1r-2v and Città del Vaticano, BAV, Vat. gr. 212 [diktyon 66843] (henceforth T), fols. 105r-107v. In the present article, I use the title Apotelesmatica, following Pingree 2001, p. 13, and I follow the numbering of the chapters as in the Pa and T.

5 Usener 1876, p. 21, and Farina 2022b, p. 233-234.

6 Pingree 2004, p. 373-374, and infra, Section 3.

7 In the pinax (W, fol. 161v) it is indicated as ἀπὸ Σαρακηνῶν βιβλίου, while in the title of the chapter (W, fol. 219r) as ἀπὸ Σαρακηνικοῦ βιβλίου. For an edition and an English translation of the chapters, see infra, Section 3.

8 See the bibliography attached to the description of the manuscript, see infra, Appendix 1.

9 Pingree 2004, p. 371-374. For an edition (Arabic and Latin) and an English translation of al-Qabīṣī’s treatise, see Burnett – Yamamoto – Yano 2004, p. 18-155, 225-364.

10 For an historiographical overview, see Mavroudi 2002, p. 398-399, Mavroudi 2023, and Acerbi – Trizio 2022 [2023].

11 The date of copying the manuscript, penned in a high-quality Perlschrift written by a single elegant and calligraphic hand, is disputed. It has recently been proposed that it dates to the mid 11th century, during the rule of Constantine IX Monomachos (r. 1042-1055) due to a perceived cultural influence of Michael Psellos (Pérez Martín 2015, p. 292-293). For further information on the manuscript, see Caballero Sánchez 2013a, p. 89-92 (who dates it to the 1060s), and Rovati 2018, p. 60 (who dates it to the 1030s).

12 Pingree 1997, p. 64-65.

13 See for example Hunger 1961, p. 226-227.

14 Text: εἰς τὸ ͵ϛψν ἔτος ἰν(δικτιῶνος) ιε· ἐν μη(νὶ) ὀ(κ)τ(ωβρίῳ)· ϛ τοῦ αὐτ(οῦ) μη(νὸς) ἡμέρᾳ· περὶ ὥραν ζ· ἐσκοτίσθη ὁ ἥλιος καὶ ἐγένετο νὺξ, περὶ ὥραν ἥμισυ· καὶ ἐφάνησ(αν) καὶ ἀστέρ(ες). This note was brought to scholarly attention in Usener 1876, p. 21.

15 On the 12th century scholarly hands to which the production of many scientific manuscripts is attributed, see Bianconi 2010, p. 90-91 (with bibliography).

16 For parallels of some peculiarities, see Alexius I’s Lavra chrysobulls dating to 1104 and 1109, and Michael VII’s Lavra imperial document dated 1074, see Cavallo 2000, III, p. 158 (tav. 8) and 160 (tav. 10).

17 Cavallo 2000.

18 On the top of the folio, above the horoscopic thema one reads: ⟦μηνὶ σεπτ(εμβρί)ω γ⟧ μηνὶ σεπτ(εμβρί)ω ι (ἰ)ν(δικτιῶνος) γ ἡμέρα δ ὥρα α λεπτὰ κθ. Pingree computed September 10th, 1169 as the date, see Boer 1962, p. 150a-b. The positions of the planets are confirmed by modern computations carried out by using Kairos 4.0 by Raymond Mercier. In the following table I set out the values found in the manuscripts (column W), those computed for Constantinople, September 10th, 1169, circa 7:29 a.m. (column MC = modern computation), and the differences between them (column Δ).

W

MC

Δ

Sun

Vi 23;45

Vi 23;54

0;9

Moon

Ar 15;57

Ar 16;43

0;46

Mercury

Vi 13;58

Vi 18;19

4;21 (!)

Venus

Sc 10;42

Sc 10;27

0;15

Mars

Vi 27;34

Vi 27;42

0;8

Jupiter

Ta 5;5

Ta 4;24

1;26

Saturn

Aq 21;52

Aq 22;35

0;43

19 For the edition of the text, see infra, Section 3.

20 The titles of the following chapters were written on a once-blank now-lost folio.

21 I offer here some preliminary observations; I will undertake a thorough philological analysis of all the texts contained in the florilegium in a future study.

22 The numbering, once reaching 137, was later corrected by Ca.

23 The items in the table are listed alphabetically by author. For a detailed analysis of W, see infra, Appendix 1; for L, see Caballero Sánchez 2013a, p. 89-92.

24 Ed. CCAG, I, p. 142-164.

25 Ed. infra, Section 3.

26 Ed. Wolf 1559; a critical edition by R. Caballero Sánchez is currently in preparation for publication in the Teubner series. W shares with L only a brief extract from the methodological scholia to Book I, see infra, Appendix 1; ed. Caballero Sánchez 2013b, p. 225-241 (without considering W). For further discussion on the text and its authorship, see Caballero Sánchez 2020, Caballero Sánchez 2021, and more recently, Caballero Sánchez 2022.

27 Ed. Pingree 1973. L and W carry different chapters, with the sole exception of Heph., Apotel., III.2.6-12.

28 Ed. Pingree 1974, p. 47-125.

29 Ed. Kühn 1830, XIX, p. 529-571 and Rovati 2018, p. 82-123.

30 Ed. CCAG, I, p. 138-139.

31 Ed. Hübner 1998. L and W carry different chapters (aside for Ptol., Apotel., II.12-13 [l. 925-1060]), both belonging to the stemmatic branch ψ, see infra, n. 52.

32 Ed. Boer 1962.

33 Ed. CCAG, I, p. 171-172 (l. 20).

34 Partial ed. CCAG, I, p. 140 (l. 16-32).

35 For orientation, refer to the English translation of Theophilus’ works in Dykes-Gramaglia 2017 for now. On the shortcomings of this publication, see László 2022, p. 254.

36 W, fols. 83v (l. 6)-106v (l. 9); 109v (l. 15)-114v (l. 3); L, fols. 69r (l. 16)-82v (l. 12).

37 CCAG, I, p. 138-139. This fragment (up to fol. 84v [l. 40]) is labelled F1 in László 2020, p. 7. As noted by Stephan Heilen, there are similarities between the Petosiris fragment contained in Julianus’ fragment (Nech. et Pet. fr. +23 Heilen) and a chapter allegedly attributed to Theophilus (Nech. et Pet. fr. +27 Heilen), see CCAG, XI.1, p. 223 l. 18-27, Heilen 2015, p. 653, 1300, and László 2020, p. 11.

38 Pingree 1997, p. 65 n. 13 states that ch. 1.13-18 come from an Arabic source, without identifying them as chapters of Theoph., De in. var. The chapter is included in the pinax of the treatise found in Pa, fol. 2r (l. 1-5).

39 Pa, fol. 2v (l. 22), cfr. Hübner 1995.

40 The mention follows the only chapters excerpted from Theoph., De in. bell. in L.

41 1: W, fols. 116v (l. 8)-117r (l. 10); L, fol. 83v (l. 12-25); 2: W, fols. 121v (l. 9)-122r (l. 12); L, fol. 85r (l. 13-31).

42 τὸ μικρόν is missing in L. The complete scholium as it reads in W is as follows: Σημείωσαι· ἱστέον ὅτι ἐὰν τίς σοι ὁμιλῇ περὶ πράγματος λαβὼν τὸν ὡροσκόπον, βλέπε εἰς ποῖον ζῴδιον ἐμπίπτει· καὶ ἐκ τούτου νόει. ἐὰν μὲν ἐμπέσῃ ἐν Κριῷ ἢ Καρκίνῳ ἢ Ζυγῷ ἢ Αἰγοκέρωτι ὅτι ἂν λαληθῇ, ἀργὰ καὶ φαῦλα. εἰ δὲ ἐμπέσῃ Ταύρῳ ἢ Λέοντι ἢ Σκορπίῳ ἢ Ὑδροχόῳ, ἰσχυρὰ καὶ βέβαια τὰ λεγόμενα. Σημείωσαι· εἰ δὲ Διδύμοις ἢ Παρθένῳ περὶ ἀνθρώπου φύσεως, καὶ ἀνώμαλα πράγματα. εἰ δὲ Τοξότῃ ἢ Ἰχθύσι, μετάμελον ἔχει τὸ πρᾶγμα καὶ οὐ γίνεται· ὡσαύτως δὲ ἐὰν ἐν φυλακῇ εἰσέλθῃ τίς ἢ |117r ἐν ἐξορίᾳ καὶ εὑρεθῇ ὁ ὡροσκόπος Κριῷ ἢ Καρκίνῳ ⟨ἢ Ζυγῷ⟩ ἢ Αἰγοκέρωτι, οὐ βραδύνει, ἀλλὰ ταχὺ ἀπολύεται. εἰ δὲ πέσῃ ὁ ὡροσκόπος ἐν Ταύρῳ ἢ Λέοντι ἢ Σκορπίῳ ἢ Ὑδροχόῳ, βραδύνει ἐν τῇ φυλακῇ μὴ καὶ δίκην δώσει. ἐὰν δὲ τοῖς λοιποῖς ζῳδίοις μετὰ προστασίας καὶ δικασιασμοῦ καὶ ἀνακρίσεως, ἀπολύεται ἀγαθοποιοὶ (sic) δηλονότι μαρτυροῦντος. τοῦτο τὸ κεφάλαιον εὕρῃς καὶ εἰς τὸ ἕτερον βιβλίον τὸ μαῦρον τὸ μικρὸν εἰς φῦλλον εἰκοστὸν ἀπὸ τὴν ἀρχήν.

43 CCAG, I, p. 140, and Boll 1899b, p. 158.

44 W, fol. 86v (l. 1); L, fol. 70r (l. 38), and W, fol. 101v (l. 6); L, fol. 77v (l. 29).

45 W, fol. 37r (l. 10); L, fol. 99v (l. 35).

46 Pa, fol. 46r (l. 2), restores μετάβασιν as a missing word. The meaningless sequence ποιεῖ τὸ in W is read as ποιεῖτο in Pa.

47 W, fol. 45r (l. 14-16); L, fol. 101v (l. 13-14).

48 ⟨ps.-⟩Heliod., Comm. is included in the second unit of the manuscript, nevertheless it is listed here because both W and L belong to the same stemmatic branch according to Boer 1962, p. x.

49 Heph., Apotel., I.3-5, 8-12 (l. 380-445, 488-745); II.12 (l. 936-993); I.12 (l. 746-775); I.14 (l. 810-839); I.18-20 (876-1018); I.21 (l. 1139-1185; 1073-1087); I.22-24 (1190-1212; 1220-1226; 1238-1265); II.13 (l. 994-1061). The fragments on fols. 146r-153v are not mentioned in the summary description of the codex in Hübner 1998, p. xvi.

50 Vuillemin-Diem – Steel 2015, p. 51 n. 13.

51 Va is the most complete manuscript used by the editors.

52 Branch ψ is opposed to the branch αβγ. For a discussion of the four-branch stemma proposed in Boll – Boer [1940] 1957, p. xvi and Hübner 1998, p. xv, and their reduction to two, see the observations in Alberti 1979, p. 41-43, Dorandi 2000, and more recently, Vuillemin-Diem – Steel 2015, p. 49-91, and Acerbi 2023, p. 129 n. 54.

53 Ptol., Apotel., II.12-13 (l. 925-1060) are the only chapters witnessed by the branch ψ and they can be therefore used as a case study of the stemmatic relations between the different branches. Conjunctive innovations include (Heph. = Heph., Apotel.; Procl. = Procli quae dicitur paraphrasis): 958 σεισμοποιὰ καὶ ἀχλυώδη αβγHeph.] om. LGVaProcl.: καὶ ἀχλυώδη om. W; 970 τρεπτικὸν αβγHeph. : uersatiuum G] τροπικὸν LVaW, cfr. Procl. (τροπῆς); 1035-37 διὰ τοῦ … συσχηματισμοῦ αβγ] διὰ τοῦ … συσχηματισμῶν (συσχημῶν Va) LVaW : per id quod … configurationum G. I hope to reassess the stemma after a complete collation of the manuscript tradition in a future study.

54 Vuillemin-Diem – Steel 2015, p. 59-81.

55 W, fols. 120v-121r (l. 10); 132v (l. 2-9); 150v (l. 6)-151v (l. 7).

56 Pingree 1973, p. 229-230. The sigla are those used in Pingree’s edition: A = Paris, BnF, grec 2841 [diktyon 52479], C = Venezia, BNM, Marc. gr. Z. 334 (coll. 553) [diktyon 69805], P = Paris, BnF, grec 2417 [diktyon 52049].

57 The only exceptions are: 1. an excerpt of Heliod. (?), In Ptol. Ap.; 2. ⟨ps.-⟩Syrus, Universal doctrine.

58 L, fols. 144v (l. 29)-145r (l. 10).

59 Supra, n. 11.

60 The text suffers from several lacunas; it makes use of a method ascribed to Theon of Alexandria that is included in a series of scholia to Ptolemy’s Handy Tables and Psephophoria, see Tihon 1973, Tihon 2017, p. 336, and Acerbi 2020, p. 283-286. The text was first printed in CCAG, VI, p. 79-80. Theon’s method is published in Lepsius 1858, p. 123-124, Biot 1896, p. 130, and more recently in Tihon 1973, p. 61, 83-89. For a discussion about the era Menophres, see Łukaszewicz 1995, p. 99-108, and Ladynin 2019, p. 245-265. The chapter reads as follows (punctuation is normalised): Περὶ τῆς τοῦ Κυνὸς ἐπιτολῆς. Λαβὼν τὰ ἀπὸ τῆς Ἀλεξάνδρου τοῦ Μακεδόνος τελευτῆς ἔτη τούτοις πρόσθες καὶ τὰ ἀπὸ Μενόφρεως ἕως τῆς τελευτῆς τοῦ αὐτοῦ Ἀλεξάνδρου ἔτη ϡϙη, καὶ τῶν συναχθέντων λαβὼν τὸ τέταρτον μέρος πρόσθες καθόλου ἡμέρας ε εἰς τὸ τέταρτον μέρος, καὶ ἐκ τῶν γενομένων ἔκκρουσον τὰς τοῦ ἐνιαυτοῦ ἐκείνου τετραετηρίδας, καὶ τὰς λοιπὰς ἡμέρας ἀπόλυσον ἀπὸ ἀρχῆς τοῦ Θὼθ διδοὺς ἑκάστῳ μηνὶ ἡμέρας λ, καὶ ὅπου δ’ ἂν καταλήξῃ ὁ ἀριθμός, ἐκείνη ἔσται ἡ τοῦ Κυνὸς ἐπιτολή. Ὑπόδειγμα. Ἡ ἀρχὴ τῆς Θεοφίλου βασιλείας γίνεται ἀπὸ Μενόφρεως ἔτη ͵βρν· τούτων τὸ τέταρτον· φλζ· τούτοις πρόσθες καθόλου ἡμέρας ε· ὁμοῦ γίνονται ἡμέραι φμβ· ἐκ τούτων ἄφελε τετραετηρίδας σιγ· καὶ μένουσι τιθ· ταῦτα ἀπομέρισον ἀπὸ τῆς ἀρχῆς τοῦ Θώθ, καὶ καταλήγει ἡ τοῦ Kυνὸς ἐπιτολὴ Ἐπιφὶ ἡμέρᾳ κθ· εἰ⟨ς⟩ δὲ κθ τοῦ Ἐπιφὶ δηλονότι τοῦ παρὰ Ἀλεξανδρεῦσιν, ὅστις μεταλαμβάνεται εἰς Ἑλληνικὸν ἤτοι Ῥωμαϊκὸν μῆνα Ἰουλίου ἡμέρᾳ κγ. καὶ ὁμοίως ἐπὶ τῶν λοιπῶν ἐτῶν τὸ αὐτὸ ποιητέον· ἔτη ἀπὸ Μενόφρεως ἕως τῆς τελευτῆς τοῦ Ἀλεξάνδρου ϡϙη· ἕως τῆς λήξεως Αὐγούστου ͵ατλε· ἕως τῆς ἀρχῆς Θεοφίλου ͵βρνα· Θεόφιλος ιβ· Μιχαὴλ σὺν τῇ μητρὶ αὐτοῦ Θεοδώρᾳ ἔτη ιδ· Μιχαὴλ μόνος ιβ· Βασίλειος ιθ· Λέων υἱὸς αὐτοῦ κϛ· Ἀλέξανδρος ἕν· [sp. 4 litt.] Κωνσταντῖνος μετὰ Ῥωμανοῦ ἕως ἰνδικτιῶνος [sp. 4 litt.] ἔτη [sp. 4 litt.]· τὰ δὲ πάντα ἔτη ἀπὸ Μενόφρεώς εἰσιν ἕως Ῥωμανοῦ καὶ ἕως ἰνδικτιῶνος [sp. 4 litt.]· τὸ τέλος ἔτη ͵βσμ· καὶ ἔστι τὸ τέταρτον φξβ· πρόσθες καὶ ε· καὶ γίνονται ὁμοῦ φξζ· ἀπὸ τούτων ἔκκρουσον τὰς τετραετηρίδας τοῦ νῦν καιροῦ, αἵτινές εἰσι σλη, καὶ μετ’ αὐτῶν τὰς πρὸ τοῦ Σεπτεμβρίου γ καὶ Ὀκτωβρίου μία τῶν λοιπῶν, καὶ τὰ ἐναπομείναντα ἀπὸ τοῦ Σεπτεμβρίου ἀπόλυσον, καὶ ὅπου καταντήσει, ἐκεῖ γίνεται ἡ ἐπιτολὴ τοῦ Κυνός. L does not preserve this chapter but witnesses two different chapters on the same subject (fols. 107v-108v, 124r-v), see CCAG, I, p. 67-68.

61 Kunitzsch 1964.

62 CCAG, V.1, p. 214-217 (published on the basis of A, fol.  209r [l. 9]-209v [l. 18], and Pa, fols. 30r [l. 2]-31v).

63 CCAG, V.1, p. 212-213.

64 Pingree 1977a, p. 211; László 2020, p. 331-332. Rhetorius’ chapter was re-computed twice, once for year 853/4 (addition of 7;10°) and once for year 887/8 (addition of 7;30°), see Tihon 2017, p. 336, and László 2020, p. 335.

65 The recomputed chapter is also witnessed to in MS Venezia, BNM, Marc. gr. Z. 334 (coll. 553) [diktyon 69805] (henceforth M), fols. 26r (l. 9)-27v (l. 3).

66 W, fols. 117r (l. 11)-117v (l. 15); 118r (l. 5)-120r.

67 On the text attributed to Syrus, see Tolsa 2019.

68 Boer 1962, p. x.

69 Boer 1962, p. 8 (ch. 5), and Neugebauer 1962, p. 145-146.

70 Boer’s branch β.

71 Ed. Boer 1962, p. 46 (l. 7)-53 (l. 16), 55 (l. 11)-59 (l. 15), 60-61 (l. 27).

72 CCAG, VIII.4, p. 45-65, Caballero Sánchez 2013a, p. 94-97, and Gioffreda 2020, p. 233-235.

73 On Argyrus, see in general PLP, n. 1285; on his manuscripts, see Gioffreda 2020 (with bibliography).

74 CCAG, I, p. 6-20, Rovati 2018, p. 49-51, and Gioffreda 2020, p. 180-184. The astrological compilation contained in I likely stems from L, for a preliminary overview of the overlapping contents of L and I, see CCAG, VIII.4, p. 45-65 and CCAG, I, p. 60-72.

75 For an overview of the witnesses of the Byzantine recension, see Boer 1962, p. x.

76 For a table showing the contents common to W and G, see infra, Appendix 2.

77 Ed. Pingree 1968.

78 On this manuscript, see at least Acerbi – Gioffreda 2019 (with bibliography).

79 See Caballero Sánchez 2013a, p. 96.

80 The erroneous reading ἀγρονομίαν instead of ἀστρονομίαν (fol. 219r [l. 2]) is likely due to the confusion between the ligature στ and majuscule γ (as written in the manuscript).

81 Burnett – Yamamoto – Yano 2004, p. 2, and Pingree 2004, p. 373.

82 As already noted by Pingree, in the chapter occurs the word ἐξάλλαξις, instead of the more common ἐναλλαγή, see Pingree 2004, p. 373 n. 12.

83 Infra, Section 3.

84 The study of the manuscript transmission of the treatise, along with the edition of its Arabic, Greek, and Latin versions and an English translation, is currently in progress. For a preliminary overview, see Pingree 2003, p. 43.

85 Pingree 2003, p. 41-57, Pingree in Yamamoto – Burnett 2019, II, p. 1-116, Csorba – Veszprémy 2020 [2022], and Farina 2022b, p. 238.

86 The manuscript is a computational primer, one of the most important witnesses of the Rechenbücher tradition, and the only witness of the fiscal treatises known as Palaia Logarikē (fols. 3r-13r) and Nea Logarikē (13r-21v) composed in circa 1118, see von Lingenthal 1857, p. 385-400, Hendy 1969, p. 50-64, and Morrisson 1979. For a thorough analysis of the manuscript, with the edition of the list of multiples and submultiples of currency units, and of the Easter Computus, see Acerbi 2021. For the Rechenbücher tradition, see Acerbi 2019.

87 It occurs on fols. 68r (marg.) (in the genitive case) and in 195r (in the accusative case), see CCAG, V.3, p. 17 (the symbol is not resolved). περὶ τοῦ γνῶναι τὸν ἀριθμὸν τῶν … μέλλη ὠφεληθῆναι παρά τινος ἄρχοντος.

88 On the manuscript, see most recently Farina 2022b, p. 247-250, Glynias 2022, p. 188-196, and Manfredi-Potenza 2022, p. 745-747.

89 De Montfaucon 1708, p. 359-360: 359. The only missing symbol in the list provided by de Montfaucon is the one for hyperpyron, which does not occur in P (a reference to it is given only by the name νόμισμα τραχὺ ἄσπρον, see Hendy 1969, p. 54).

90 The chapter is published in CCAG, V.1, p. 145-146 (the symbol occurs on p. 146, l. 22) on the basis of A, fol. 42v (the symbol is not resolved).

91 For an English translation of the Arabic chapter, see Dunlop 1971, p. 235-236. The symbol probably was unknown to the Latin translator of the text which chose to render it in “minas”, see Federici Vescovini 1998, p. 299: «Dedit igitur ei rex mille minas…».

92 On Pe, see Šangin 1926, and CCAG, XII, p3-6.

93 From the 13th century onwards, the word hyperpyron and nomisma were used interchangeably, see Andréadès 1924, p. 75 and Frolow 1949, p. 244-246. A late occurrence of the symbol is found in the notes by Isidore of Kiev (1385-1463) in MS Città del Vaticano, BAV, Vat. gr. 1896 [diktyon 68525], fol. 277r (l. 1-5), see Canart 1970, p. 553 (the symbol is resolved in hyperpyra, correcting Mercati 1926, p. 52 n. 1), and Farina 2023, p. 100-101.

94 V, fol. 196r (ch. 14): Εἶπον τῷ Ἀπομάσαρ· ποία ἐστὶν ἐπικρατεστέρα σημασία, ἡ τῶν ζῳδίων ἢ ἡ τῶν ἀστέρων; καὶ εἶπε μοι ὅτι ἡ τῶν ζῳδίων· τοσοῦτον γὰρ ὑπερνικᾷ ἡ σημασία τῶν ζῳδίων τῶν σημασίων τῶν ἀστέρων, ὅσον τὸ νόμισμα τοῦ μιλιαρισίου. In Latin: Dixi Albumazari: «Que est efficacior significatio, signorum vel astrorum?» Respondit mihi quod signorum, et tantum supergreditur significatio signorum significationem astrorum quantum moneta aurea argenteam.

95 Hendy 1969, p. 89-96.

96 The second horoscope is preserved solely in Latin, see Csorba – Veszprémy 2020 [2022], p. 86. On the Greek version of the first horoscope (ch. 35), see also Caballero Sánchez 2018, p. 150-156.

97 Ed. CCAG, VI, p. 81, Stegemann 1939, fr. 59, and Pingree 1976, p. 374.

98 Pingree 1976, p. 374.

99 Ed. Pingree 1976, p. 3-158.

100 See Pingree 1989, Pingree 1997, p. 63-77, and Pingree 2001. On Pingree’s publications, how to read them and on the historiography concerning translations from Arabic into Greek, as well as for a broad overview of the state of research, see Mavroudi 2023, p. 236 n. 87 (with bibliography). On how Pingree’s theory has been used in Gutas 1998, see Acerbi – Trizio 2022 [2023], p. 129-131. On translations from Arabic into Greek (both historiography and texts), see Mavroudi 2002, p. 392-429; Gutas 2012, Mavroudi 2019 [2020], Kaldellis 2022, p. 403-405, 411-420, Glynias – Chitwood – Pahlitzsch 2022, Cronier – Guardasole – Pietrobelli 2023, Mavroudi 2023, and Miguet 2024, p. 11-23.

101 Pingree 1997, p. 65.

102 Pingree 1997, p. 71. Pingree stressed his opinion in later works, see Pingree 2003, p. 43, Pingree 2004, p. 373, Pingree 2006, p. 236-237, and Pingree in Yamamoto – Burnett 2019, II, p. 1.

103 Pingree 1997, p. 74.

104 On John Abramius, his manuscripts, and the links he established with other contemporary scholars (such as Isaac Argyrus), see Farina 2022a, p. 205-249 (with bibliography).

105 Pingree 1989, p. 237; Pingree 1997, p. 64-78.

106 On Theophilus, see Pingree 2001, p. 13-17 and Hoyland 2011, p. 4-7, and Heilen 2015, p. 928-929. On Stephanus, see Wolska-Conus 1989, Tihon 1993, p. 183-190, Magdalino 2006, p. 17-57, Martelli 2016, and Glynias 2022, p. 190-196.

107 Pingree 1989, p. 239.

108 CCAG, II, p. 181-186: 181-182. The text is published on the basis of MS Venezia, BNM, Marc. gr. Z. 335 (coll. 645) [diktyon 69806], fols. 25r-27v, without taking into account the recension contained in V, fols. 8r-11r.

109 de Boor 1883, p. 467-468, see also Magdalino 2006, p. 55.

110 On the identification of Constantinople and the discussion of the 5° deviation, see Tihon 1993, p. 183-190.

111 CCAG, II, p. 182 l. 2.

112 Pingree 1997, p. 64, 68, and Pingree 2001, p. 12.

113 A thorough study of the manuscript transmission of Theophilus’ works is in progress, for now see Pingree 2001, p. 20-21, and László 2022, p. 253-257.

114 Tihon 1993, p. 183-190. In addition to the evidence adduced by Tihon, recall that the name of the author of the treatise, in V, fol. 8r, is added by a later hand and that the treatise’s last paragraph (fols. 10v [l. 14]-11r) is written by a different copyist from the one which copied the other paragraphs and contains an extended version of the text published in CCAG, II, p. 186. These features have been first pointed out in Glynias 2022, p. 190-191 n. 22.

115 Tihon links this feature with the diffusion of the Byzantine adaptation of Ibn al‐ʾAʿlam’s tables, which dates to at least 1032, see Tihon 1989, and Tihon 2017, p. 330 (and the bibliography mentioned there).

116 Jones 1987, p. 32-35.

117 CCAG, II, p. 182 l. 19.

118 Magdalino 2003, p. 19, Caudano 2012, p. 53, Caudano 2021, p. 40-44, and Glynias 2022, p. 194.

119 Additional considerations should be made about the significance of the influx of Arabic astrology into Byzantium via Stephanus-Theophilus, described as “the Byzantine astrologer of the Umayyad period” by Ibn Ḫaldūn, see Rosenthal 1958, p. 216. Theophilus’ sources were mostly Greek (Dorotheus/Julianus [De in. bell./De in. var.], Rhetorius/Ptolemy [Apotel.], Dorotheus/Nechepso-Petosiris [De in. cosm.]) and his treatises were most likely written in Greek, see Pingree 2001, p. 15-16. It has been pointed out (Mavroudi 2006, p. 88) that the language he used is not without inconsistencies in the use of technical terms (Χηλαί and Ζυγός for Libra, CCAG, VIII.1, p. 268 l. 23, 270 l. 8) and Arabism (θεοῦ συνεργοῦντος for bi-ʾawn allāh, CCAG, V.1, p. 234 l. 19). Now, the presence of both Χηλαί and Ζυγός to indicate Libra is no inconsistency and could just result from different resolutions of the standard sign, while the presence of an Arabism could be read as an authorial mark, as Theophilus was a polyglot. These treatises cannot be read in a critical edition yet, see Pingree 2001, p. 14, and Mavroudi 2006, p. 87-88.

120 CCAG, XI.1, p. 206 [l. 15-16]: ἐν Διδύμοις μετὰ τῆς τῶν καλοποιῶν μαρτυρίας ἄπρακτον ἀναχώρησιν τῶν πολιορκούντων σημαίνει. L only carries a small chunk of Theoph., De in. bell. on fols. 170v-171v (these lines occurs on fol. 171v l. 5-7), but the fact that entire treatise would have been included in the archetype of L’s florilegium is Pingree’s speculation. It likely draws upon a chapter by Dorotheus on starting to row the ship in the water, see Doroth., Carmen, V.25, ed. Pingree 1976, p. 282-286.

121 Sophoulis 2012, p. 167-169, and Petersen 2013, p. 571.

122 Pingree 1968, p. viii n. 3: fols. 74r-76v, 77r-78r, 80v-81r, 82v-84r, 94r-94v, 129r.

123 It also occurs in MS Venezia, BNM, Marc. gr. Z. 324 (coll. 640) [diktyon 69795], and is edited in Pingree 1977b, 308-309. The Byzantine version of the De rev. nat. is referred to in a later dialogue (Hermippi de astrologia) likely dating to the time of Theodorus Meliteniotes (d. 1393), see Boll 1912 (on the authorship of the dialogue, see Mercati 1924, Jürss 1966, Bardi 2021, p. 7-8, and Bardi 2023, p. 4).

124 Given the arrangement and variety of these horoscopic chapters (which include nativities, inceptions, and solar transits), they appear to be a collection of examples exemplifying a number of techniques, composed by a 11th-century professional astrologer. This astrologer, who was possibly born on October 11th, 984 and was prone to commit calculation mistakes, combined several techniques, mostly taken from Valens, Anth., IV, VII but also from Dorotheus, Hephaestion of Thebes and Maximus. On the manuscript, see Glynias 2022, p. 197-199.

125 Once attributed to Eleutherius Eleus Zebelenus, it is neither by Eleutherius of Elis (fl. 1388) nor by Eleutherius of Gabala (fl. 1164). On the confusion on Eleutherius, see at least Pingree 1977b, p. 308-309, Bezza 2002, p. 299-300, Magdalino 2003, p. 23, and Magdalino 2006, p. 101.

126 Pingree 1968, p. 124-132.

127 Farina 2022b, p. 241 (with bibliography).

128 Pingree 1997, p. 73-74.

129 On the circulation of astrological florilegia dating to the reign of Manuel I, see Caudano 2012, in particular the works of John Synadenus (horoscopes dated to 1153 and 1162). The attention towards astronomy and astrology in the mid 12th century is confirmed by the lists of stars in V, fols. 30v-33r (dated 1155/6 and 1160/1), and by the interrogatio universalis by Eleutherius Zebelenus (fl. 1164), likely to be identified as the Byzantine translator of the Kitāb al-mudḫal fī ṣanāʿat ʾaḥkām al-nuǧūm by ʾAbū ’l-Ḥasan Kūšyār b. Labbān included in the Εἰσαγωγὴ καὶ θεμέλιον εἰς τὴν ἀστρολογίαν· ποίημα Ἀχμάτου τοῦ Πέρσου; see Yano 1997, p. 1-261 for the Arabic text and English translation, and Bezza 2002, for the edition and translation of the third book of the Byzantine version. On fol. 160v of W one finds a stylised Circle of Petosiris which recurs also in Synadenus-related manuscripts, see for example MS Napoli, BN, II.C.33 [diktyon 46079], fol. 309r, and Safran 2020, p. 375.

130 In my set-out below, the text is put in parallel with the Arabic original, taken from the edition Burnett – Yamamoto – Yano 2004, p. 108.

131 See supra, Section 1, n. 97.

132 On conjunctions, see at least Heilen 2020.

133 Details are as follows. Ch. 42 considers the positions of the Sun, the Moon, Mercury, and Venus. Ch. 43 addresses the position of the Lord of the Ascendant, see Yano 1997, II.8. Chapters 46 and 46b examine the outcomes of the Ascendant of the revolution of the year. Chapter 47, likely a pseudepigraphic work translated from Arabic into Greek, is attributed to Dorotheus and focuses on the influence of the planets in their morning phases during the revolution of the year, see ed. Pingree 1976, p. 374. Chapter 48 presents the Sun, the Moon, and Saturn when they enter Libra. Chapter 50 considers the Sun’s entry into Aries. Chapter 51 examines Mars, Venus, Mercury, Saturn, and the Moon as indicators or the Lords of the year. Chapter 51b addresses the Moon when the Sun enters the first part of the zodiac. Chapters 51c and 52 focus on the revolution of the year and provide an example of how the universal Ascendant is determined.

134 See Yano 1997, II.8. On klimata, see also Honigmann 1929.

135 Some letters have been restored thanks to an autoptic analysis of the manuscript.

136 In keeping with the copyist’s consistent style, I retained the grave accent of oxytone words before weak punctuation (marked by a comma). I tacitly corrected the grave accent to an acute accent before strong punctuation, see Noret 2014, p. 111-112. For a Byzantine technical text edited by following closely the accent (even in cases like ἴδε) and punctuation conventions of the prototype of the manuscript tradition, see most recently Acerbi – Di Mambro 2023, p. 27.

137 Noret 2014, p. 130-133. I adhere to the copyist’s practice in preserving the orthotonic form ἐστί(ν)/εἰσί(ν) across all chapters, even when the verb is preceded by an oxytone, paroxytone, perispomenon, or properispomenon word. I retained the recessive form ἔστι(ν) when it is preceded by καί, εἰ, ὅταν, μέν, and δέ, as is consistently done by the copyist.

138 Noret 1995. As the clause structure of these texts is highly formulaic, I have tacitly normalised punctuation whenever the copyist committed obvious mistakes. I refrained from inserting commas between syntactically inseparable parts of the sentence. Noret 1995, p. 71: «Mon propos n’est pas de traiter des différents signes, mais plutôt de la place où on trouve, en grec, une ponctuation, quelle que soit la forme que prend cette dernière (virgule, point en haut, point en bas, etc.)». On the punctuating Byzantine texts, see also Mazzucchi 1997.

139 The English translation follows the facing Greek text. The ordinals are written as full words only when in the manuscript they are written as such, otherwise with a termination at the exponent.

140 See infra, ch. 42, 48, and 51.

141 Lightfoot 2023, p. xii.

142 Useful tools are the indexes and explanations in Bouché-Leclerq 1899, Neugebauer 1960, Neugebauer – Van Hoesen 1987, p. 1-13, Bezza 2005, Heilen 2015, and Lightfoot 2021, p. 875-895. On the grammar and of astrological texts and on translating them, see Heilen 2010a, Heilen 2016, p. 511-512, 516-520, and László 2022, p. 20-21.

143 Heilen 2010a, p. 300. I have frequently “translated” liminal καί with punctuation. Some technical terms are simply transliterated: kentron (pl. -tra), apoklima (pl. -mata), (ep)anaphora (pl. -ai), klima (pl. -mata), nomisma (pl. -mata), noummion (pl. -mmia). The term τόπος is translated locus (pl. -ci).

144 Greek transliteration of al-Qabīṣī (d. 967).

145 Literally, “Saracen”. For the common use of the term Σαρακηνικός as “Arab”, see Christides 1969, Christides 1972; Savvides 1997, and Sahas 2021.

146 The last folio of the table of contents is missing.

147 Ἀστρονομίαν εἰσαγωγῆς refers to the Arabic title Kitāb al-mudḫal ʾilā ʿilm al-nuǧūm. In both Greek and Arabic, there is an ambiguity between “astrology” and “astronomy”, therefore, a more literal translation has been preferred, as noted in Hübner 1989, and Saliba 1999, respectively.

148 μα] Wmg.

149 ἀγρονομίαν] lege ἀστρονομίαν (quod tacite restituit Pi1).

150 For a discussion of the meanings of the term ὡροσκόπος, see Greenbaum – Ross 2010, p. 146-148. ὡροσκόπος indicates either the point where the ecliptic intersects the eastern horizon or the locus in which this point is. For the sake of better comprehension, in the following chapters I will use the modern term “Ascendant”, instead of transliterating “horoscopos”, as in Neugebauer – Van Hoesen 1959 [1987]. For a critical discussion, see Heilen 2010a, p. 307.

151 μβ] Wmg.

152 Literally, “coin”.

153  Following the previous claim that explicitly states that goods and money are antagonistic, it is to be intended as “scarce”, see infra, n. 156.

154 Literally, χρυσάφιον stands for a small gold object; in the translation, it is likened to χρυσός, as explicitly stated in the following lines of the chapter.

155 These are the impressions of images and letters on coins, see infra, ch. 51. The word γράμμα related to coins is also commonly used as a unit of measurement (lat. scripulum) of 1,111g, see Schilbach 1970, p. 184.

156 “Rising, ἀνατολικοί” and “setting, δυτικοί” have to be intended as “visible due to their distance from the Sun” and “invisible due to their proximity to the Sun”, respectively. For further explanations, see Denningmann 2005, app. 1, p. 386-474, and Denningmann 2007.

157 From Latin dignitas, it expresses a condition of prestige which can be intended as relationship and right of dominion, meaning that a planet has rulership over a place and authority over a matter. The expression is well attested in Heph., Apotel., and is Theophilus’ treatises.

158 εὐθηνεῖται] fortasse legendum κνιπεύει.

159 ὁ] suppl. : om. W.

160 εἰς] suppl. : om. W.

161 κνιπεύῃ] lege κνιπεύει.

162 ὑψοῦται] lege ὑψοῦνται.

163 τοῖς] suppl. : om. W.

164 ταπείνωμα] lege ταπεινώμασιν.

165 μγ] Wmg.

166 “Likewise” is likely to be supplied, see infra, n. 167.

167 ο] fortasse legendum ὁμοίως

168 μδ] Wmg.

169 ὄρθια] lege ὀρθὰ.

170 με] Wmg.

171 θέλεις] lege θέλῃς.

172 εἰς τὰ μέρη] suppl. : om. W.

173 μϛ] Wmg.

174 Vacuum reliquit W] ἐναλλαγῆς restituendum.

175 εἰς] suppl. : vacuum reliquit W.

176 εἰς] suppl. : om. W.

177 γου] τρίτου KrPi1.

178 μζ] Wmg.

179 Literally, “under the beams”.

180 πλήρης] lege πλήρη (corr. KrPi1).

181 κυριεύουσι] κυριεύουσιν Pi1.

182 κνιπείαν] κνιπεύειν KrPi1.

183 μη] Wmg.

184 ʾAbū Isḥāq Muḥammad b. Hārūn al-Rašīd, known as al-Muʿtaṣim (r. 833-842), is the eighth ʿAbbāsid Caliph, see Bosworth 1993, p. 776.

185 It probably refers to the flood of Baghdad that occurred in 835, see Karaǧī 1940, p. 11.

186 αὐτῆς] lege αὐτοῦ.

187 κνιπείαν] fortasse legendum εὐθηνίαν.

188 μὴ] lege μὲν.

189 μθ] Wmg.

190 That means retrograding. The verb ὀρθοποδίζω is usually rendered with terms close to ἀναποδίζω/ἀναποδισμός in astrological texts, or to προηγέομαι/προήγησις, see Toomer 1984, p. 20 and Heilen 2010a, p. 312.

191 That is, the two equinoxes and the two solstices.

192 ν] Wmg.

193 It translates the Arabic dinār, see supra, Section 2.

194 The Greek χάρτης/χαρτίον generally means a sheet or roll of papyrus (see LSJ 116441-116443) that is rendered in Arabic as waraq bardiyy. Even if by most accounts paper is said to have been introduced and spread in the Islamicate world from July 751 (victory on the Talas) onwards, and a paper mill is attested in Baghdad already in 794, see Karabaceck 1887, p. 121, documentary papyri from the ninth and tenth century are well attested, see for example, Mira Grob 2010. It cannot be ruled out, even if less plausible, that it is to be intended as “paper”, given that one of the Arabic words for paper is qirṭās, loan from Aramaic and Greek, see Gacek 2001, p. 114. Further internal references to papyri are found infra, ch. 51.

195 αὐτὸν] lege αὐτοὺς.

196 να] Wmg.

197 It translates the Arabic ʿanbar.

198 φασωλίου] lege φασουλίου.

199 κνιπείας] lege κνιπείαν.

200 ἐν τῷ Κριῷ] εἰς πυρῶδες W1sl.

201 ὑδαργύρου] lege ὑδραργύρου.

202 ἀερώδη] suppl. W1.

203 καὶ πασῶν] καὶ πασῶν ὁ suppl. W1.

204 ὑδατώδη δηλοῖ λεῖψιν] τώδη δηλοῖ λ (sic) suppl. W1.

205 εἰ δὲ ὁ] suppl. W1.

206 ζῴδιον] suppl. W1.

207 εἰς γεῶδες ζῴδιον] suppl. : εἰς γαιώ suppl. W1.

208 δηλοῖ λεῖψιν τ] suppl. W1.

209 καὶ] suppl. : om. W.

210 κονδύλων] lege κονδυλίων.

211 χρόνου] ἕως ᾧδας (sic) W1mg.

212 τόποις] ἀπῶδε (sic) Wmg.

213 κνιπείαν] fortasse legendum εὐθηνίαν.

214 ὑπὸ γῆν] ὑπογῆν W.

215 Vacuum reliquit W.

216 κρίνῃς] lege κρῖνε.

217 This happens when one of the five planets begins or stops retrograding.

218 τρόπον] lege τόπον.

219 That is, March 14th, 1111.

220 Generally, the term περίπατος indicates the motion of the planets along the zodiac (ecliptic circle).

221 νυκτὸς] suppl. Pi2.

222 τὸ αον] suppl. Pi2.

223 Κωνσταντινουπόλει] Κω⟨ν⟩σταντίνου πόλει Pi2.

224 ὅριος] lege ὁρίοις.

225 ὅριος] lege ὁρίοις.

226 Κρόνου] suppl. Pi2.

227 On fol. 227r only bits of words and of a thema, dated to the month of May, are readable.

228 τῶν] lege τῆς.

229 -σὶ] suppl. Pi2.

230 -ν Ἰχθύων] suppl. Pi2.

231 -δ ὥρας] suppl. Pi2.

232 -σα] suppl. Pi2.

233 ἦν] ἐστι Pi2.

234 λεπτὰ] suppl. Pi2.

235 ἀπὸ] suppl. Pi2.

236 τῆς νυκτὸς] γ´ λεπτὰ (?) ⟨κ⟩ suppl. Pi2.

237 Two quires are lost.

238 It includes fol. 122/1.

239 μανουὴλ τ(οῦ) νικηφόρ(ου) |1 ἐπήρ[…] [τ](ὸν) βλεμίδ[ην], ἵνα[ |2 διακομίσῃ τ[ῷ] βασιλεύοντι |3 τῷ δούκαν εἰς τ(ὸν) μελένικ[ον] |4 ὢν [τ]ῷ δημη[τρ]ίῳ τῷ |5 βουλωτῇ, ἐκ θεσ[σα]λονίκ(ης), a Demetrios Boullotes (Meliknasar) was οἰκεῖος of Manuel II, in Constantinople in 1401-1414, see PLP, n. 3084. Demetrios Boullotes was is mentioned in Mazaris’ Journey to Hades, and in documents dating to 1401 and 1404, see Westerink 1975, p. 40; ΜΜ, II, p. 509-510, 513-515, and Lefort et al. 2019, p. 197, 199. The text has been transcribed for the first time in Hunger 1961, p. 227 (and dated around 1255).

240 The beginning of the manuscript is lost, it starts with ch. κζ Ἡφαιστίονος περὶ καταρχῶν.

241 For an analysis of the horoscopic data, see supra, Section 1.

242 The text on fols. 7r (l. 6)-7v (l. 1) corresponds to the one published in CCAG, IX, p. 176-179: 177-178 on the basis of MS Oxford, Bodleian Library, Cromwell 12, p. 1219 (15th-16th century) [diktyon 47802]. On fol. 7v (l. 18-21) and in continuity with the text a quote begins from Ptol., Apotel., II.7.2, ed. Hübner 1998, p. 127 (l. 563-566).

243 Ptol., Apotel., II.9.11-II.14.4, ed. Hübner 1998, p. 139 (l. 754)-160 (l. 1086): the text ends ex abrupto.

244 It is a recension and conflation of different (and separated) chapters: Theoph., Apotel., 2-6 and 9-13, see Pa, fols. 25r-29r, 32r, 45v and T, fols. 135r-v, 151r-152v. It contains a description of the qualities of Venus (partial) and Mercury (complete) in the different Terms. Incomplete at the beginning, the text starts with Venus in Libra (Aries-Virgo are missing). The texts pertaining to Saturn-Mars are missing as well. On the doctrine of the Terms, see Hübner 1998, p. 68-81 (1. 21), and Heilen 2010b (with bibliography).

245 Ed. CCAG, VIII.1, p. 261-263 (l. 6), see also A, fols. 94v-95r.

246 Valens, Anth. app. XV (= Anth. III.6, 1-21), ed. Pingree 1986, p. 424-425.

247 The manuscript contains ch. 1-13 of the work as it can be read in Pa, fols. 22r-43r (l. 5) and T, fols. 132v (l. 4)-152v. The dedication (δευτέρα ἔκδοσις) to Deucalion, present in both manuscripts (ed. CCAG, V.1, p. 234-238) is omitted in W. The reconstructed order of the chapters (in keeping with W’s division) of the treatise as present in Pa is as follows: ch. 1: 19v (l. 20)-21v; 2 (part.): 32r-33r (l. 22); 3: 33r (l. 22)-34r (l. 9); 4: 34r (l. 9)-35v, 46r-47v, 22r-29r (l. 12); 5: 30r (l. 2)-31v, 36r-40r (l. 22); 6: 40r (l. 23)-40v (l. 9); 7: 40v (l. 9-18); 8: 40v (l. 18)-41r (l. 10); 9: 41r (l. 11-24); 10: 41r (l. 24)-41v (l. 27); 11: 41v (l. 28)-42r (l. 23); 12: 42r (l. 24)-42v (l. 16); 13: 42v (l. 16-24); 14: 42v (l. 25)-43r (l. 5).

248 The chapters are anonymous, apart from ch. 27 attributed to Hephaestion of Thebes: κζ Ἡφαιστίονος περὶ καταρχῶν (fols. 80r-v [l. 11]). The text began on a now lost folio but its title is given in the table of contents (fol. 2r). The chapters are rearranged excerpts from Heph., Apotel., III.5.3.57-60, III.41.5, III.5.56, ed. Pingree 1973, p. 247 (l. 3-13); 305 (l. 21-30); 246 (l. 26)-247 (l. 2). The other chapters are: κγ καταρχαὶ πρὸς τὰ ὅρια τῶν ἀστέρων πρὸς Κρόνον is followed by: κδ περὶ τοῦ ὑγιαίνει ἢ ἀρρωστεῖ (fol. 79r [l. 11-15]); πότε σύλληψις γίνεται (fol. 79r [l. 15-18]); κε περὶ τῆς φυσικῆς τῶν καταρχῶν ἐνεργείας (fols. 79r [l. 18]-79v); κη καθολικὰ παραγγέλματα (fols. 80v [l. 12]-82r [l. 18]); κθ ἐξ ὧν ἡ σελήνη καὶ οἱ ἀστέρες βλάπτονται [fols. 82r (l. 18)-83v (l. 5) = L, fols. 68v (l. 17)-69r (l. 15)]. The chapters are witnessed to in M, ch. ιε-ιζ together with chapters of Theoph. Apotel., and De in. var. (fols. 10r-38r, see CCAG, II, p. 16-18). The chapter πότε σύλληψις γίνεται is witnessed also in MS Paris, BnF, grec 2417, together with Theoph., <Apotel.>, 27, and Theoph., De in. var., 6.1-4.

249 The collection contains Theoph., De in. var., 5-12 and 19-30 (as indicated in the table of contents in T, fol. 106v); Theoph., De in. var., 1-2, 9-11, 13, 16, 20; 3-8, 12, 14-15 (as indicated in the table of contents in T, fols. 107r-v). The same treatise (ch. 1-20) can be read in L, fols. 69r (l. 16)-82v (l. 12) as well.

250 L, fol. 82v (l. 25-32).

251 F1: ed. CCAG, I, p. 138-139; L, fols. 84r (l. 16)-84v (l. 24), see László 2020, p. 6-11: 7.

252 Heph., Ep.2, III.0-III.1.6, ed. Pingree 1974, p. 81-83. For a comparison with the fragments contained in L, see also Olivieri 1898, p. 1-27 and infra, Appendix 2.

253 A heavily rewritten recension of Paul of Alexandria’s Elementa apotelesmatica, ch. 25 with marginal notes. The text arranges the chapter in a different order, see Boer 1958, p. 72-75. It runs as follows: (fols. 114v [l. 4]-115r [l. 5]) ⟨Paul of Alexandria, Elem. apotel.⟩, 25, ed. Boer 1958, p. 74 (l. 9)-75 (l. 5); (fols. 115r [l. 5]-115v [l. 3]) an anonymous text that mentions Heliodorus begins (l. 10: ὡς δὲ λέγει Ἡλιόδωρος ὅτι…); it refers to ⟨ps.-⟩Heliodorus, Comm., ch. 24, ed. Boer 1962, p. 78-83: 80 and quotes Paul verbatim, with some expansions; (fols. 115v [l. 6]-116v [l. 8]) ⟨Paul of Alexandria, Elem. apotel.⟩, 15, ed. Boer 1958, p. 72 (l. 17)-74 (l. 9). A final scholium on fols. 116v (l. 8)-117r (l. 10) can also be read in L, fol. 83v (l. 12-25).

254 Only ch. on fols. 117r (l. 11)-117v (l. 15); 118r (l. 5)-118v (l. 2) are attributed to ʾAbū Maʿšar in the manuscript, see Usener 1876, p. 21 n. 1-2 (incomplete transcription), and Farina 2022b, p. 233-234.

255 Ed. CCAG, VI, p. 79.

256 Heph., Apotel., III.2.6-12, ed. Pingree 1973, p. 229-230. It is witnessed to in L, fols. 83v (l. 35)-84r (l. 16) as well.

257 Details on this sequence of texts are as follows. Two short excerpts, the second of which contains a somewhat altered version of Ant. Pal. XIV, 70, which includes an oracle given by Serapis in the Serapeum in Alexandria [W, fol. 121r (l. 10-18)]: ὅτι πᾶς ἀστὴρ τὸν ἴδιον διαμετρoῦν οἶκον κακὸς ἐστὶν, ἑαυτὸν γὰρ ἐναντιοῦται. ὅτι φησὶν πάππος τίς θεοφιλὴς· ἄτυχον χρισμὸν (sic) εἴληφεν ἐν τῷ Σεραπίῳ Ἀλεξανδείας ὃς ἀπωδύρετο πενίαν· ὁ δὲ χρισμὸς (sic) οὕτως εἶχεν· ὁ παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ αὐτῷ δοθεὶς Σαράπιδος· μὴ μέμφου μοιρεῖ, μὴ θεοὺς, μὴ δαίμονας· ὥρην δὲ Μέμφου ἣν πατὴρ ἔσπειρέ σε, see Paton 1918, p. 60-61 a for an English translation. An extract from the methodological scholia of Heliod. (?), In Ptol, Apotel., 30.2-4 (= Ptol., Tetr., 1.2.15) [W, fols. 121r (l. 18)-121v (l. 9)] which can also be read in L, fol. 32v (l. 20-26), ed. Caballero Sánchez 2013b, p. 238. Three anonymous short excerpts, ed. CCAG, I, p. 140 (l. 16-32), which are also contained in L, fol. 85r (l. 13-31) where they are organized in six fragments [W, fols. 121v (l. 9)-122r (l. 12)]. The last excerpt refers to the second exile of Patriarch Photius (886), ed. CCAG, I, p. 140 (l. 29-32), and Boll 1899b, p. 158. One anonymous excerpt quoting Ptol., Apotel., I.14, ed. Hübner 1998, p. 53 (l. 834)-53 (l. 839), fols. 122r (l. 12)-122v (l. 10).

258 For a description of the contents, see CCAG, VI, p. 22-25. The chapters included in the collection are mostly anonymous and yet to be identified. In the main text the identified texts are indicated.

259 Max., Paraph.1, I.8, 11, 6, and 9 (with two added paragraph at the end on fols. 128v [l. 15]-129r [l. 5]), and I.11, ed. Radici Colace 1988, p. 100-109, 119-121, 86-95, 108-111.

260 Heph., Ep.2, III, 27, ed. Pingree 1974, p. 124-125.

261 Theoph., De in. bell., ch. 41.

262 Heph., Apotel., III.8, ed. Pingree 1973, p. 259-260.

263 Heph., Ep.2, III.13-14, ed. Pingree 1974, p. 110-112 (= Doroth., Carmen, app. V.39, 1-40, ed. Pingree 1976, p. 419-420).

264 Heph., Apotel., III.23-24, ed. Pingree 1973, p. 276-277.

265 Ed. CCAG, VIII.1, p. 172-177. W pertains to the same recension of M and MS Paris, BnF, grec 2419 [diktyon 52051], fol. 69v.

266 Ed. CCAG, I, p. 171-172 (l. 20). The chapter is also contained in L, fols. 145r (l. 10)-145v (l. 12). On the text and its authorship, see Tolsa 2019, p. 1-4.

267 F14-F15: ed. CCAG, VI, p. 80 (l. 9-18 and 19-33), see László 2020, p. 6-11: 7.

268 In addition, on fols. 143v (l. 19)-145r (l. 10) one reads a chapter concerning how to find the rising of Sirius (περὶ τῆς τοῦ Κυνὸς ἐπιτολῆς) keyed to the era Menophres, which was computed under the reign of Romanus I Lecapenus (r. 919-944), see supra, n. 60.

269 One folio at the end is missing, the list ends with ch. 42: περὶ εὐθηνίας εἰδῶν καὶ κνιπείας ἀπὸ Σαρακηνῶν βιβλίου μέθοδοι αὗται μετεγράφησαν.

270 Ed. Boer 1962, p. 1-144.

271 Ed. Pingree 2004, p. 373-374, and supra, Section 3.

272 Ed. supra, Section 3.

273 Doroth., Carmen, app. IV 1, 5-9, lastly edited in Pingree 1976, p. 374, and supra, Section 3. See also supra, Section 1, n. 97.

274 Ed. supra, Section 3.

275 The text on fol. 227r is too fragmented to be read, even if an ἔτος ϛ[…] [μ]αΐου and a fragment of a thema are readable.

276 On the Greek manuscripts of Ogier Ghislain de Busbecq, see Gastgeber 2020, p. 145-181.

277 Lambeck’s description says: «Codex manuscriptus Philosophicus Grecus est chartaceus pervetustus, principio & fine mutilus, constatque nunc folijs ducentis viginti sex…», see Lambeck 1679, p. 255.

278 Whenever the correspondence between G and W is not indicated in the table, there is perfect correlation between the two MSS.

279 Omission of the reference to the “book of Julianus”.

280 Omission of the reference to the “black book”.

281 Omission of the reference to “Patriarch Photius”.

282 Omission of the reference to “Dorotheus”.

Haut de page

Pour citer cet article

Référence papier

Luca Farina, « The transmission of (Arabo-)Byzantine astrological texts »Mélanges de l’École française de Rome - Moyen Âge, 137/1 | 2025, 61-95.

Référence électronique

Luca Farina, « The transmission of (Arabo-)Byzantine astrological texts »Mélanges de l’École française de Rome - Moyen Âge [En ligne], 137/1 | 2025, mis en ligne le 19 septembre 2025, consulté le 11 décembre 2025. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/mefrm/16184 ; DOI : https://doi.org/10.4000/14r8e

Haut de page

Auteur

Luca Farina

École française de Rome, luca.farina@efrome.it

Haut de page

Droits d’auteur

CC-BY-NC-ND-4.0

Le texte seul est utilisable sous licence CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Les autres éléments (illustrations, fichiers annexes importés) sont susceptibles d’être soumis à des autorisations d’usage spécifiques.

Haut de page
Rechercher dans OpenEdition Search

Vous allez être redirigé vers OpenEdition Search