[2397] In BN 6880 there are other headings written in capitals than
those which mark the openings of the 36 chapters.
[2398] Cap. 29 (1889), pp. 304-6.
[2399] Cap. 35 (1889), p. 361.
[2400] Cap. 8 (1889), p. 80.
[2401] Cap. 5 (1889), p. 49.
[2402] For such mentions of experience and experiment see the following
passages in the 1889 edition, numbers referring to page and line: 31,
7; 34, 3; 35, 14; 44, 2; 53, 1; 58, 21; 64, 34; 65, 30; 66, 26; 72,
22; 73, 7; 74, 2; 77, 9; 80, 28; 81, 29; 89, 3 and 29; 96, 14 and 31;
102, 27; 120, 32; 123, 15; 129, 21; 133, 10; 145, 33; 148, 25; 149, 26;
160, 18; 176, 5; 178, 25; 186, 15; 190, 20; 192, 31; 211, 1; 222, 18;
224, 31; 230, 3; 235, 15; 236, 14; 239, 8 and 26; 242, 8 and 23; 248,
20; 256, 9; 258, 5; 264, 21; 276, 35; 281, 19 and 27; 282, 15; 308, 21;
312, 6 and 19 and 22; 314, 25; 326, 28; 327, 13; 334, 29; 343, 23; 351,
23 and 25; 353, 4; 354, 19; 356, 6; 362, 32; 370, 22 and 37.
[2403] Cap. 15 (1889), p. 146.
[2404] Cap. 23 (1889), p. 239.
[2405] Caps. 20 and 24 (1889), pp. 208 and 244.
[2406] Cap. 26 (1889), pp. 264-6.
[2407] Cap. 29 (1889), p. 311; and see cap. 28, p. 298.
[2408] Cap. 12, p. 123.
[2409] Cap. 16, p. 166.
[2410] Cap. 23, p. 238.
[2411] Cap. 34, p. 357.
[2412] Cap. 8, p. 69.
[2413] Cap. 8, p. 66.
[2414] Cap. 12, p. 125.
[2415] Cap. 10, p. 113.
[2416] Cap. 10, p. 112; NH 30, 11.
[2417] Cap. 8, p. 68; NH 29, 38.
[2418] Cap. 29, p. 313.
[2419] Cap. 29, p. 314. Pliny has a similar procedure with a frog and a
reed.
[2420] Cap. 22, p. 230.
[2421] Cap. 33, p. 347, “mulierem verendaque eius dum cum ea cois
tange.”
[2422] Cap. 23, p. 239.
[2423] Cap. 1, p. 34.
[2424] Cap. 25, p. 247.
[2425] Cap. 12, p. 126.
[2426] Cap. 18, p. 178.
[2427] Cap. 17, p. 176.
[2428] Cap. 32, pp. 337, 338, 340.
[2429] Cap. 8, p. 70.
[2430] Cap. 12, p. 123.
[2431] Cap. 36, p. 379. Marcellus employs the phrase, of course, to
indicate a private or personal incantation, and as a matter of fact it
is somewhat less absurd than a number of others.
[2432] Cap. 28, p. 301.
[2433] Cap. 29, p. 310. For further instances of incantations and
characters in the _De medicamentis_ see page 110, lines 18-27; 111,
26-33; 112, 29-113, 2; 116, 8-11; 133, 18-22, 26-31; 139, 17-26; 142,
19-26; 149, 4-11; 151, 18-33; 152, 9-14, 19-24; 180, 1-3; 220, 11-20;
221, 2-6; 223, 15-18; 241, 1-6, 14-22; 244, 26-28; 248, 16-19; 260,
22-24; 295, 18-22; 333, 9-15; 382, 16-18.
[2434] Daremberg (1870) I, 257-8.
[2435] _Plinii Secundi Iunioris de medicina libri tres_, ed. V. Rose,
Lipsiae, 1875. V. Rose, “Ueber die Medicina Plinii,” in _Hermes_, VIII
(1874) 19-66.
[2436] _C. Plinii Secundi Medicina_, ed. Thomas Pighinuccius, Rome,
1509.
[2437] Codex St. Gall 751; described by V. Rose, _Hermes_, VIII, 48-55;
_Anecdota_ II, 106.
[2438] For the list of his six genuine works see above p. 222.
[2439] De nota aspirationis and De diphthongis, ed. Osann, Darmstadt,
1826, with _De orthographia_, a forgery by a sixteenth century humanist.
[2440] Περὶ ἑρμηνείας, sometimes printed as the third book of the _De
dogmate Platonis_. Some scholars, however, regard it as genuine, and
there are a number of MSS of it from the 9th, 10th, and 11th centuries.
See Schanz (1905), 127-8.
[2441] See above p. 290.
[2442] See Schanz (1905), 139-40.
[2443] See below p. 683. Schanz fails to mention it among the
apocryphal works of Apuleius.
[2444] H. Köbert, _De Pseudo-Apulei herbarum medicaminibus_, Bayreuth,
1888. Schanz (1905) 138, mentions only continental MSS, although there
are numerous MSS of it in the British Museum and Bodleian libraries,
some of which have been used and others described by O. Cockayne in his
edition of the _Herbarium_ and the other treatises accompanying it in
his _Leechdoms, Wortcunning, and Starcraft of Early England_, Vol. I
(1864) in RS XXXV. Nor does Schanz note Cockayne’s book.
[2445] See Sloane 1975, a vellum MS of the 12th or early 13th century
written in fine large letters and beautifully illuminated; Ashmole
1431, end of 11th century, and 1462, 13th century, fol. 45r. Harleian
4986, Apuleii Platonici de medicamentis cum figuris pictis, is another
early illuminated English MS. Cockayne I, lxxxii, does not date it, but
the MSS catalogue lists it as tenth century. In CU Trinity 1152, 14th
century, James (III, 162-3) estimates the number of colored drawings as
between 800 and 1000; he describes only a few. Singer (1921) reproduces
a number of such illuminations from MSS of the _Herbarium_ and of
Dioscorides.
[2446] Lucca 236, 9-10th century, “Herbarium Apuleii Platonici
quem accepit a Chironi magistro Achillis et ab Escolapio explicit
feliciter.” In Cotton Vitellius C-III, early 11th century, in
Anglo-Saxon, although the title reads, “The Herbarium of Apuleius the
Platonist which he received from Esculapius and Chiron the centaur,
the master of Achilles,” a full page painting shows Plato and Chiron
receiving the volume from Aesculapius (Cockayne, I, lxxxviii). And
Sloane 1975 and Harleian 1585 speak of the _Herbarium_ as “Liber
Platonis Apoliensis.” In a 15th century MS (Rawlinson C-328, fol.
113v-, Incipit de herbis Galieni Apolei et Ciceronis) Galen and Cicero,
who perhaps replace Chiron and Aesculapius, are associated with
Apuleius as authors.
[2447] Daremberg (1853), 11-12, said that the pagan incantations
were preserved intact in a number of MSS at Oxford and Cambridge.
Conjurations of herbs are not limited to the Pseudo-Apuleius in
medieval MSS but sometimes occur singly as in Perugia 736, 13th
century, where at fol. 267 a 14th century hand has added a passage in
Latin which may be translated: “In the name of Christ, Amen. I conjure
you, herb, that I may conquer by lord Peter etc. by moon and stars etc.
and may you conquer all my enemies, pontiff and priests and all laymen
and all women and all lawyers who are against me etc.” In Sloane 1571,
15th century, fols. 1-6, at the close of fragments of a Latin-English
dictionary of herbs is a Latin prayer entitled, _Benedictio omnium
herbarum_.
[2448] The above passages are from Sloane 1975 and the edition of 1547.
[2449] Ashmole 1431, 11th century, fol. 3r, “In nomine domini incipit
herboralium apuleii platonis quod accepit ascolapio et chirone centauro
magistro. Lege feliciter. Precantatio omnium herbarum ad singulas
curas.” CU Trinity 1152, 14th century, fol. 1. Gonville and Caius 345,
14th century, fol. 89v.
[2450] Or Papyriensis Placitus.
[2451] Perhaps merely for “auctor.” ed. Fabricius, Bibl. Graec. XIII,
395-423, _Sexti Placiti liber de medicina ex animalibus_.
[2452] In Montpellier 277, 15th century, “Liber Sesti platonis de
animalibus,” perhaps because the Apuleius of the _Herbarium_ is
called a Platonist. In Digby 43, late 14th century, fol. 15, “Liber
Septiplanti Papiensis de bestiis et avibus medicinalis.” In Rawlinson
C-328, 15th century, fol. 128, “Incipit liber Papiriensis ex animalibus
ex avibus.” The work is sometimes found in juxtaposition with a
somewhat similar “Liber medicinalis de secretis Galieni,” concerning
which see below, chapter 64, II, 761.
[2453] V. Rose (1875) 337-8 suggests that this is a fragment from a
fuller work of Aesculapius to Augustus cited by Thomas of Cantimpré,
Albertus Magnus, and Vincent of Beauvais. See also Peter of Abano, _De
venenis_, cap. 5, “in epistola Esculapii philosophi ad Octavianum.” But
perhaps these writers refer to the entire work of Sextus Papirius.
[2454] Ed. Ruellius, with Scribonius Largus, Paris, 1529.
[2455] In a later medieval vocabulary _taxus_ is given as a synonym for
the animal called _camaleon_: _Alphita_, ed. Daremberg from BN 6954 and
6957 in De Renzi, _Collectio Salernitana_, III, 272-322.
[2456] Cotton Vespasian B, X, #6.
[2457] Harleian 3859, called tenth century in the Harleian catalogue
which is often incorrect in its dating, but 11th or 12th century
by d’Avezac, Mommsen in his edition of Solinus, and Beazley, _Dawn
of Geography_, I, 523. Royal 15-B-II and 15-C-IV, both of the 12th
century. For other MSS at Paris, Leyden, and Rome see Beazley, _op.
cit._
[2458] But after all is Suetonius any more respectable a historian than
Aethicus and Solinus are geographers?
[2459] Bunbury, _History of Ancient Geography_, II, Appendix: “How
M. Wuttke can attach any value to such a production is to me quite
incomprehensible; still more that he should ascribe the translation
to the great ecclesiastical writer,” Jerome. Bunbury believed that
the work was not earlier than the seventh century. Beazley, _Dawn of
Geography_, I, 355-63, is of the same opinion.
[2460] In his edition of Solinus, p. xxvii, he contends that certain
passages which Wuttke pointed out as common to Aethicus and Solinus are
borrowed by Aethicus from Isidore who died in 636.
[2461] Harleian 3859.
[2462] Steele, _Opera hactenus inedita_, 1905, Fasc. I, pp. 1-2.
[2463] CUL 213, 14th century, fols. 103v-14, “Qui hunc librum legit
intelligat Ethicum philosophum non omnia dixisse que hic scripta sunt,
set Solinus (so James, but _Jeronimus_ in d’Avezac, p. 237) qui eum
transtulit sententias veritati consonas ex libro eiusdem excerpsit et
easdem testimonias scripture nostre confirmavit. Non enim erat iste
philosophus Christianus sed Ethnicus et professione Achademicus.”
[2464] Bridges I, 267-8.
[2465] Cited by d’Avezac, pp. 257 and 267.
[2466] Vienna 2272, 14th century, fol. 92, De vindemiis a Burgundione
translatus: Pars Geoponicorum.
[2467] Such is the view set forth in PW _Geoponica_.
[2468] H. Beckh, _Geoponica sive Cassiani Bassi scholastici de re
rustica eclogae_, Lipsiae, Teubner, 1895. PW criticizes this edition as
“_leider völlig verfehlten_.” Its preface lists the earlier editions.
[2469] _Geoponica_, VII, 5; II, 15.
[2470] VII, 11; XV, 1.
[2471] I, 12; VII, 13; etc.
[2472] XV, 1.
[2473] R. Heim, _Incantamenta magica graeca latina_, in _Jahrb.
f. class. Philologie_, Suppl. Bd. 19, Leipzig, 1893, pp. 463-576,
drew from the _Geoponica_ 13 out of his total of 245 instances of
incantations from Greek and Latin literature.
[2474] VII, 14.
[2475] XIII, 15.
[2476] The first two volumes, published at Berlin in 1907, 1906,
covered the first four of the five genuine books. A previous attempt
was K. Sprengel’s edition in vols. 25-26 of C. J. Kühn’s _Medici
Graeci_, Leipzig, 1829. On the textual history and problems see further
Wellman’s articles: “Dioskurides” in Pauly-Wissowa, and in _Hermes_,
XXXIII, (1898) 360ff.
[2477] Περὶ βοτανῶν, περὶ ζῴων παντοίων, περὶ παντοίων ἐλαίων, περὶ
ὕλης δένδρων, περὶ οἴνων καὶ λίθων, is another order suggested.
[2478] The MS is said by Singer (1921) 60, to have now been removed
from Vienna to St. Mark’s Library at Venice; it was procured
from Constantinople in 1555 for the future Emperor Maximilian II
(1564-1576). A photographic copy was published in 1906 in the Leiden
Collection, _Codices Graeci et Latini_, by A. W. Sijthoff, with an
introduction by A. von Premerstein, C. Wessely, and J. Mantuani
(C. Wessely, _Codex Anciae Iulianae_, etc., 1906). See also A. v.
Premerstein in the Austrian _Jahrbuch_ (1903) XXIV, 105ff.
I have examined the facsimile of this MS and found the large but faded
and partially obliterated illuminations which precede the text rather
disappointing after having read the description of them in Dalton’s
_Byzantine Art_, (1911) 460-61, which, however, I presume is accurate
and so reproduce here. These large illuminations include a portrait
of Juliana Anicia, an ornamental peacock with tail spread, groups
of doctors engaged in medical discussions, and Dioscorides himself
seated writing, and again seated on a folding stool receiving the herb
mandragora (which, of course, was a medieval favorite) from a female
figure personifying Discovery (Εὕρησις), “while in the foreground a dog
dies in agony,” presumably from the fatal effects of the herb. There
are rough reproductions of this last picture in Woltmann and Woermann,
_History of Painting_, I, 192-3, and Singer (1921) 62. When the text
proper begins the illuminations are confined to medicinal plants.
Other early Greek manuscripts are the _Codex Neapolitanus_, formerly
at Vienna, now at St. Mark’s, Venice, an eighth century palimpsest
from Bobbio, and a Paris codex, (BN Greek 2179) of the ninth century.
An Arabic translation from the Greek seems to have been made about
850; a century later the Byzantine emperor sent a Greek manuscript of
Dioscorides to the caliph in Spain.
For the full text of the _De materia medica_ we are dependent on MSS of
the 11th, 12th, 13th and later centuries.
[2479] Περὶ δηλητηρίων φαρμάκων and περὶ ἰοβόλων, edited by Sprengel
in Kühn (1830), XXVI, as was the Περὶ εὐπορίστων ἁπλῶν τε καὶ συνθέτων
φαρμάκων. The Περὶ φαρμάκων ἐμπειρίας, (“Experimental Pharmacy”), of
which a Latin version, _Alphabetum empiricum, sive Dioscoridis et
Stephani Atheniensis ... de remediis expertis_, was edited by C. Wolf,
Zürich, 1581, is an alphabetical arrangement by diseases ascribed to
Dioscorides and Stephen of Athens (and other writers).
[2480] Max Wellmann, _Die Schrift des Dioskurides_ Περὶ ἁπλῶν φαρμάκων,
1914, and col. 1140 of his article “Dioskurides” in Pauly-Wissowa.
[2481] _De inst. div. lit._ cap. 31.
[2482] V. Rose in Hermes VIII, 38A. Harleian 4986, fol. 44v, “...
marcelline libellum botanicon ex dioscoridis libris in latinum sermonem
conversum in quo depicte sunt herbarum figure ad te misi....”
[2483] Heinrich Kaestner, _Kritisches und Exegetisches zu
Pseudo-Dioskorides de herbis femininis_, Regensburg, 1896; text in
_Hermes_ XXXI (1896) 578-636. Singer (1921) 68, gives as the earliest
MS, Rome Barberini IX, 29, of 9th century. Some other MSS are: BN
12995, 9th century; Additional 8928, 11th century, fol. 62v-; Ashmole
1431, end of 11th century, fols. 31v-43, “Incipit liber Dioscoridis ex
herbis feminis”; Sloane 1975, 12th or early 13th century, fols. 49v-73;
Harleian 1585, 12th century, fol. 79-; Harleian 5294, 12th century;
Turin K-IV-3, 12th century, #5, “Incipit liber dioscoridis medicine ex
herbis femininis numero LXXI .../ ... Liber medicine dioscoridis de
herbis femininis et masculinis explicit feliciter.”
In Vienna 5371, 15th century, fols. 121v-124v, is a briefer Latin
treatise ascribed to Dioscordes, which begins with the herb
_aristologia_ and mentions silk (_sericum_) at its close. I have not
seen the MS but from the title, _Quid pro quo_, and the fact that
the writer dedicates it to his uncle, one might fancy that it was a
work written by Adelard of Bath’s nephew in return for the _Natural
Questions_ of his uncle. (See below, chapter 36).
[2484] _Hermes_ VIII, 38, comparing _Etymologies_ XVII, 93, with cap.
30 of the _De herbis femininis_.
[2485] _Anecdota graeca et graeco-latina_, Berlin, 1864, II, 115 and
119; Hermes VIII, 38; Wellmann (1906), p. xxi.
[2486] BN 9332, 8th century; CLM 337, 9-10th century from Monte
Cassino; ed. T. M. Auracher et H. Stadler, in _Rom. Forsch._ I, 49-105;
X, 181-247 and 368-446; XI, 1-121; XII, 161-243.
[2487] Cod. Bam. L-III-9.
[2488] PW “Dioskurides.” A fairly early MS is CU Jesus 44, 12-13th
century, fols. 17-145r, “diascorides per modum alphabeti de virtutibus
herbarum et compositione olerum.” I have not seen it but, if correctly
dated, it and Bologna University Library 378, 12th century, which is
said to differ from the printed editions, are too early to be Peter of
Abano’s version.
[2489] _Explicit dyascorides quem petrus paduanensis legendo corexit
et exponendo quae utiliora sunt in lucem deduxit_, Colle, 1478.
_Dioscorides digestus alphabetico ordine additis annotatiunculis
brevibus et tractatu aquarum_, Lugduni, 1512. And see Chap. 70,
Appendix II.
[2490] I have read it in BN 6820, fol. 1r, as well as in the 1478
edition.
[2491] A work by Serapion which Simon Cordo of Genoa translated from
Arabic into Latin with the help of Abraham, a Jew of Tortosa. Serapion
states at the beginning that his work is a combination of Dioscorides
and of the work of Galen on medicinal simples. _Aggregator_ was printed
in 1479, _Liber Serapionis aggregatus in medicinis simplicibus.
Translatio Symonis Ianuensis interprete Abraam iudeo tortuosiensi de
arabico in latinum._
[2492] Ruska (1912), p. 5, says that Dioscorides, V, 84-133, among
other things describes “eine ganze Reihe von höchst zweifelhaften
Steinen mit unglaublichen Wirkungen die in den Arabischen
Arzneimittelverzeichnissen und Steinbüchern niederkehren.”
[2493] Amplon. Folio 41, fols. 36-7; Montpellier 277, caps. 46-67
of the treatise entitled, _Liber aristotelis de lapidibus preciosis
secundum verba sapientium antiquorum_.
[2494] Sloane 3848, 17th century, fols. 36-40.
[2495] _Macer Floridus de viribus herbarum una cum Walafridi Strabonis,
Othonis Cremonensis et Ioannis Folcz carminibus similis argumenti_, ed.
Ludovicus Choulant, 1832.
[2496] V. Rose himself corrected (_Hermes_, VIII, 330-1) the strange
statement which he had made (_Hermes_, VIII, 63) that the name “Macer”
is not found in connection with this work until MSS of the 14th and
15th centuries. Both the treatise and the name are frequent in the
earlier MSS.
[2497] Cotton, Vitellius C, III.
[2498] The Dane, Harpestreng, who died in 1244, translated and
commented upon the poem; published by Christian Molbech, Copenhagen,
1826.
[2499] There are a large number in the MSS collections of the British
Museum alone. Some said to be of the 12th century are Harleian 4346,
and at Erfurt Amplon, Octavo 62a and 62b.
[2500] See the British Museum catalogue of printed books. I have used
besides Choulant’s text of 1832 an illustrated octavo edition probably
of 1489. The poem also appears in medical collections such as _Medici
antiqui omnes_, Aldus, Venice, 1547, fols. 223-46.
[2501] Choulant (1832) Preface.
[2502] Choulant (1832) _Prolegomena ad Macrum_, p. 14.
[2503] See the description of _Ligusticum_, lines 900-6.
[2504] Often printed: ed. F. A. Reuss, Würzburg, 1834; in Migne PL 114,
1119-30.
[2505] H. Stadler, _Die Quellen des Macer Floridus_, in Sudhoff (1909).
[2506] Stadler, _op. cit._; Choulant (1832), p. 4.
[2507] “Macer scripsit metrico stilo librum. de viribus
herbarum,”—Stadler (1909), 65.
[2508] It was, however, a good deal subject to later interpolation.
[2509] Choulant (1832) adds as _Macri spuria_ 487 lines concerning
twenty herbs.
In Vienna 3207, 15th century, fols. 1-50, Macer Floridus, De viribus
herbarum; fols. 50-52, Pseudo-Macer, De animalibus et lignis.
[2510] Lines 1901-2, _Quae, quamvis natura potens concedere posset Vana
tamen nobis et anilia iure videntur_.
[2511] Lines 1881-3, _Hanc herbam gestando manu si queris ab egro Dic
frater quid agis? bene si responderit eger, Vivet, si vero male, spes
est nulla salutis_.
[2512] Herb 54, lines 1728-.
[2513] Herb 49, lines 1617-27.
[2514] Herb 67, lines 2095-.
[2515] Herb 51, lines 1685-9.
[2516] Herb 52.
[2517] Herb 34, lines 1135-8.
[2518] Herb 41, lines 1421-2.
[2519] Herb 50, lines 1641-63.
[2520] Herb 69, _Cyminum_, lines 2118-9, “Hoc orthopnoicis miram
praestare medelam Experti dicunt cum pusce saepius haustum.”
[2521] Vienna 2532, 12th century, fols. 106-17, “Experimenta Macri.
Ad dolorem capitis. Accipe balsamum et instilla .../ ... adde sucum
celidonie et superpone vulneribus.”
Arundel 295, 14th century, fols. 222-33, “Experimenta Macri collecta
sub certis capitulis a Gotefrido.”
[2522] R. L. Poole, _Medieval Thought_, 1884, pp. 19, 21.
[2523] Migne, PL 70, 1146.
[2524] _Anicii Manlii Severini Boetii Philosophiae Consolationis Libri
quinque_, ed. R. Peiper, Lipsiae, 1871, pp. xxxix-xlvi, li-lxvii. See
also Manitius (1911), pp. 33-5.
It was by seeking comfort in _The Consolation of Philosophy_ after the
death of Beatrice that Dante was led into a new world of literature,
science, and philosophy, as he tells us in his _Convivio_; cited by Orr
(1913), p. 1.
[2525] Manitius (1911), pp. 29-32.
[2526] _Ibid._, 26-8. At the time I went through the various catalogues
of MSS in the British Museum item by item it was not my intention to
include Boethius in this investigation, and I am therefore unable to
say whether the Museum has MSS which may throw further light upon
the problems connected with the mathematical treatises ascribed to
Boethius. Manitius mentions no English MSS in this connection, but
there are likely to be some at London, Oxford, or Cambridge.
[2527] _Boethius’ Consolation of Philosophy_, translated from the Latin
by George Colville, 1556; ed. with Introduction by E. B. Box, London,
1897, p. xviii.
[2528] Manitius (1911) pp. 35-6; Usener, _Anecdota Holderi_, Bonn,
1877, pp. 48-59; E. K. Rand, _Der dem Boethius zugeschriebene Traktat
De fide catholica_, 1901. The _De fide catholica_, however, is not
mentioned by Cassiodorus and is regarded as spurious.
[2529] _De consol. philos._, III, 8, 21.
[2530] _De consol. philos._, IV, 1.
[2531] _Ibid._, III, 9, 1; III, 12, 14; III, 9, 10; III, 12, 99; II, 8,
13.
[2532] _Ibid._, IV, 6, 10, “In hac enim de providentiae simplicitate,
de fati serie, de repentinis casibus, de cognitione ac praedestinatione
divina, de arbitrii libertate quaeri solet.” To the ensuing argument
are devoted the sixth and seventh chapters of Book IV and all of Book V.
[2533] _Ibid._, IV, 6, 21.
[2534] _Ibid._, IV, 6, 30.
[2535] _Ibid._, IV, 6, 48.
[2536] _Ibid._, IV, 6, 77.
[2537] _De consol. philos._, V, 4-6.
[2538] _Ibid._, IV, 6, 58.
[2539] _Ibid._, V, 2-3 and 6, 110, “tametsi nullam naturae habeat
necessitatem atqui deus ea futura quae ex arbitrii libertate proveniunt
praesentia contuetur.”
[2540] _Ibid._, V, 1.
[2541] _De musica libri quinque_, I, 1-2 and 27; in Migne, PL 63,
1167-1300.
[2542] Migne, PL 83, 963-1018. In Harleian 3099, 1134 A. D., the
_Etymologies_ at fols. 1-154, are followed by the _De natura rerum_,
the last chapter of which (fol. 164v) is numbered 42 instead of 48 as
in Migne. But up to chapter 27, _Utrum sidera animam habeant_, the
division into chapters seems the same as in the printed text.
[2543] Migne, PL 82, 73-728, a reprint of the edition of Arevalus,
Rome, 1796. Large portions of the _Etymologies_ have been translated
into English with an introduction of some seventy pages by E. Brehaut,
_An Encyclopedist of the Dark Ages_; _Isidore of Seville_, 1912, in
_Columbia University Studies in History_, etc., vol. 48, pp. 1-274. For
Isidorean bibliography see pp. 17, 22-3, 46-7 of Brehaut’s introduction.
[2544] Manitius (1911), pp. 60-61; Brehaut (1912), p. 34.
[2545] To say, for example, that “so hospitable an attitude toward
profane learning as Isidore displayed ... was never surpassed
throughout the middle ages” (Brehaut, p. 31), is unfair to many later
writers, as our discussion of the natural science of the twelfth and
thirteenth centuries will show.
[2546] Brehaut (1912), p. 34.
[2547] Migne, PL 82, 73, “Opus de origine quarumdam rerum, ex veteris
lectionis recordatione collectum, atque ita in quibusdam locis
adnotatum, sicut exstat conscriptum stylo maiorum.”
[2548] See, for example, _Etymol._, VIII, 7, 3, “Vates a vi mentis
appellatos, Varro auctor est.”
[2549] _Etymol._, XX, 2, 37.
[2550] Cassiodorus, however, urged the monks of the sixth century who
cared for the sick to read Hippocrates and Galen as well as Dioscorides
and Caelius Aurelianus; Brehaut (1912), p. 87, note, citing PL 70,
1146, in the _De instit. divin. litterarum_.
[2551] _Etymol._, XII, 4, 6 and 6, 34.
[2552] _Ibid._, XII, 4, 12.
[2553] _Ibid._, XII, 6, 56.
[2554] _Ibid._, XVII, 7, 17 and 9, 36; XIX, 17, 8.
[2555] _Ibid._, XVII, 9, 85.
[2556] _Ibid._, XVII, 9, 30.
[2557] _Etymol._, XVI, 15, 21-26.
[2558] _Ibid._, XI, 3, 4, “quod plurimis etiam experimentis probatum
est.”
[2559] Brehaut (1912), p. 3.
[2560] _Etymol._, XVI, 26, 10, from Epiphanius, _Liber de ponderibus et
mensuris_.
[2561] Hence, presumably, the _sextarii_, from _sex_.
[2562]
“Mens hausti nulla sanie polluta veneni
Incantata perit....”
[2563] Migne, PL 83, 9.
[2564] For Rabanus’ account see Migne, PL 110, 1097-1110; Burchard,
PL 140, 839 _et seq._; Ivo, PL 161, 760 _et seq._; Hincmar, PL 125,
716-29. Moreover, Burchard continues to follow Rabanus word for word
for some ten columns after the conclusion of their mutual excerpt from
Isidore, while Ivo is identical with Burchard for fifteen more columns.
In “Some Medieval Conceptions of Magic,” _The Monist_, January, 1915,
XXV, 107-39, I stated (p. 109, note 2) that I thought that I was the
first to point out the identity of these four accounts with Isidore’s.
Since then, however, I have noticed that Manitius (1911), p. 299, notes
the identity of Rabanus with Isidore, “Dass Hraban sich auch sonst
ganz an Isidor anlehnt, beweist er in der Schrift _De consanguineorum
nuptiis_ im Abschnitt _de magicis artibus_ (Migne, 109, 1097ff.) der
aus _Etym._ 8, 9 stammt.” Also Mr. C. C. I. Webb, in his 1909 edition
of the _Polycraticus_ notes John of Salisbury’s borrowings from Isidore
and Ivo of Chartres. Finally, J. Hansen, _Zauberwahn, Inquisition,
und Hexenprozess im Mittelalter_, 1900, at p. 49 notes that Isidore’s
sketch of the history of magic keeps recurring in medieval writings, at
p. 71 the dependence of Rabanus and Hincmar upon Isidore, and perhaps
he somewhere notes the identity with the foregoing of the accounts of
magic in Burchard and the other decretalists, but in the absence of an
index to his volume I do not find such a passage. At p. 128, however,
he notes that John of Salisbury’s description of magic is in part taken
word for word from Isidore and Rabanus.
Professor Hamilton, in one of his papers on _Storm-Making Springs_,
which appeared at about the same time as my article (_Romanic Review_,
V, 3, 1914; but, owing probably to war conditions, this issue did not
actually appear until after the number of _The Monist_ containing
my article), came near noting the same thing when he spoke (p. 225)
of Isidore’s chapter as “quoted at length” by Gratian—who seems
to me, however, to give the substance of Isidore’s chapter rather
than his exact wording—and further noted that four lines of Latin
which he quoted were found alike in Rabanus, Hincmar, Ivo, and the
_Polycraticus_ of John of Salisbury.
In my article I also stated: “Professor Burr, in a note to his paper
on ‘The Literature of Witchcraft’ (_American Historical Association
Papers_, IV (1890), p. 241) has described the accounts of Rabanus and
Hincmar but without explicitly noting their close resemblance, although
he characterizes Rabanus’ article as ‘mainly compiled.’” Professor
Burr subsequently wrote to me, “That I did not mention the relation
in my old paper on “The Literature of Witchcraft” was partly because
they borrowed from other sources as well and partly because Isidore
is himself a compiler. I hoped to come back to the matter in a more
careful study of the whole genesis of these stock passages.”
[2565] See below, chapter 60 on Aquinas.
[2566] _Etymol._, VIII, 11, 15-17; _Differentiarum_, II, 14.
[2567] Indeed, _Differentiarum_, II, 39, he defines astrology as he had
astronomy in _Etymol._, III, 27. In _Etymol._, III, 25, he ascribes the
invention of astronomy to the Egyptians and that of astrology to the
Chaldeans.
[2568] Caps. 14 and 27.
[2569] _De nat. rer._, III, 4; PL 83, 968.
[2570] _Ibid._, XIX, 2.
[2571] _Ibid._, XXII, 2-3.
[2572] _Ibid._, IX, 1-2.
[2573] _Ibid._, XXVI, 15; _Etymol._, III, 71, 16.
[2574] _Etymol._, XIV, 5, “vim sideris.”
[2575] _Ibid._, IX, 2, “secundum diversitatem enim coeli.”
[2576] _Ibid._, IV, 13, 4.
[2577] _De nat. rerum_, XVIII, 5-7.
[2578] _History of the Anglo-Saxons_, III, 403.
[2579] _Illustrations of the History of Medieval Thought_, 1884, p. 20;
p. 18 in 1920 edition.
[2580] Migne, PL 90, 293-4.
[2581] A few MSS, chiefly from France, earlier than the 12th century,
are: BN 5543, 9th century; BN 15685, 9th century; BN nouv. acq. 1612,
1615, and 1632, all 9th or 10th century; Amiens 222, 9th century;
Cambrai 925, 9th century; Ivrea 3, 9th century; Ivrea 6, 10th century;
Berlin 128, 8-9th century; Berlin 130, 9-10th century; CLM 18158, 11th
century; CLM 21557, 11th century.
I have not noted the MSS of Bede in the British Museum and Bodleian
collections.
[2582] PL 90, 187-278; the text occupies but a small portion of these
columns.
[2583] _Ibid._, Cap. 14.
[2584] _Ibid._, Cap. 24.
[2585] _Ibid._, Cap. 25.
[2586] _In Samuelem prophetam allegorica expositio_, IV, 7; PL 91, 701.
[2587] _De tonitruis libellus ad Herefridum_, PL 90, 609-14.
[2588] See below, chapter 29.
[2589] The _Aenigmatum Liber_ forms a part of the _Liber de septenario
et de metris_ in Aldhelm’s works as edited by Giles, Oxford, 1844, and
reprinted in Migne, PL 89, 183-99.
[2590] Cantimpré’s citations of Adhelmus seem almost certainly
drawn from the _Aenigmata_ in the cases of _Leo_, _ciconia_,
_hirundinus_, _nycticorax_, _salamander_, _luligo_ (or, _loligo_),
_perna_, _draguntia lapis_ (_natrix_), _myrmicoleon_, _colossus_, and
_molossus_. On the other hand, the citations concerning _onocentaur_
do not correspond to the riddle _De monocero sive unicorni_; the two
accounts of Scylla are different; and I do not find _cacus_ or _onager_
or harpy or siren or locust or the Indian ants larger than foxes in the
_Riddles_ as edited by Giles.
The passages in which Thomas of Cantimpré cites Adhelmus are printed
together by Pitra (1855) III, 425-7.
[2591] Pitra (1855) III, xxvi. Only in the case of the salamander
does Pitra say, “Thomas huc adduxit Adhelmi Shirbrunensis aenigma de
Salamandra vatemque a philosopho clare distinxit.”
[2592] I have used the text in Migne, PL vol. 77.
[2593] _Variarum_ IV, _Epist._ 22-23, Migne, PL 69, 624-25.
[2594] I derive the following facts from E. C. Quiggin, “Irish
Literature,” in EB V, 622 _et seq._, where further bibliography is
given.
[2595] “The Gaelic medical MSS, whether preserved in Ireland,
Scotland, or elsewhere, ... are all, or nearly all, of foreign
origin”:—Mackinnon, in the _International Congress of Medicine_,
London, 1913, p. 413.
[2596] G. Flügel, _Alkindi, genannt der Philosoph der Araber, ein
Vorbild seiner Zeit_, Leipzig, 1857.
F. Dieterici, _Die Naturanschauung und Naturphilosophie der Araber im
zehnten Jahrhundert_, Berlin, 1861.
O. Loth, _Al-Kindi als Astrolog._ in _Morgenländische Forschungen.
Festschrift für Fleischer_, Leipzig, 1875, pp. 263-309.
A. Nagy, _Die philosophischen Abhandlungen des Al-Kindis_, 1897 in
_Beiträge z. Gesch. d. Philos. d. Mittelalt._, II, 5.
A. A. Björnbo and S. Vogl, _Alkindi, Tideus, und Pseudo-Euclid, Drei
Optische Werke_, Leipzig, 1911, in _Abhandl. z. Gesch. d. Math. Wiss._,
XXVI, 3.
For further bibliography see the last-named work and Steinschneider
(1905) 23-4, 47, (1906) 31-33.
_The Apology of Al Kindy_ (Sir Wm. Muir, London, 1882) is a defense of
Christianity by another writer of about the same time.
[2597] _Astrorum iudicis Alkindi, Gaphar de pluviis imbribus et ventis
ac aeris mutatione, ex officina Petri Liechtenstein: Venetiis, 1507._
[2598] Amplon. Quarto 151, fols. 17-19.
[2599] In the 1412 catalogue of Amplonius, Math. 48 was “Theorica
Alkindi de radiis stellicis seu arcium magicarum vel de phisicis
ligaturis”; and at present Amplon. Quarto 349, 14th century, fols. 47v,
65v, 66r-v, 16r-v, 29r, contains “Liber Alkindi de radiis Omnes homines
qui sensibilia / Explicit theorica artis magis (_sic_). Explicit
Alkindi de radiis stellicis.”
Harleian 13, 13th century, given by John of London to St. Augustine’s
Abbey, Canterbury (#1166, James, 330-1), fols. 166-74, “de radiis
stellicis Omnes homines qui sensibilia / explicit Theoria Artis Magice
Alkindi.”
Digby 91, 16th century, fols. 66-80, Alkindus de radiis stellarum,
“Omnes homines qui sensibilia sensu percipiunt....”
Digby 183, end 14th century, fols. 38-45.
Selden supra 76 (Bernard 3464), fols. 47r-60v, “Incipit theoreita
artium magicarum. Capitulum de origine scientie. Omnes homines qui
sensibilia sensu percipiunt....”; Selden 3467, #4.
Canon. Misc. 370, fols. 240-59, “Explicit theoria magice artis sive
libellus Alkindi de radiis stellatis anno per me Theod. scriptus Domini
1484....”
Rawlinson C-117, 15th century (according to Macray, but since the MS
once belonged to John of London it is more likely to be 13th century),
fols. 157-69, “Incipit theorica Alkindi et est de causis reddendis
circa operationes karacterum et conjurationes et suffumigationes et
ceteris huiusmodi quae pertinent ad artem magicam. ‘Omnes homines qui
sensibilia.’ ...”
BN nouv. acq. 616, 1442 A. D., Liber Jacobi Alchindi de radiis.
CU Trinity 936 (R. 15, 17) 17th century, Alkyndus de Radiis.
Ste. Geneviève 2240, 17th century, fol. 32 (?)—since the treatise
is listed between two others which begin at fols. 68 and 112,
respectively—“Alkyndus de radiis; de virtute verborum.”
Steinschneider (1906), 32, has already listed four of these MSS, but
was mistaken in thinking Cotton Appendix VI, fols. 63v-70r, “Explicit
Iacob alkindi de theorica planetarum,” the same treatise as _The Theory
of the Magic Art_.
[2600] In Digby 91 Roger Bacon on Perspective is followed by Alkindi on
the rays of the stars, while in Digby 183 a marginal note to Alkindi’s
treatise reads “Nota hoc quod est extractum de libro Rogeri Bakun de
celo et mundo, capitulo de numero celorum,” and following the work of
Alkindi we have Bacon on the retardation of old age and perhaps also
_de radiis solaribus_.
[2601] Edited by Nagy (1897). A MS of the late 12th or early 13th
century which Nagy fails to note is Digby 40, fols. 15v-25, de somno et
visionibus.
[2602] Nagy, p. 18, “Quare autem videamus quasdam res antequam sint? et
quare videamus res cum interpretatione significantes res antequam sint?
et quare videamus res facientes nos videre contrarium earum?”
[2603] Spec. astron. cap. 7. More fully the Incipit is, “Rogatus fui
quod manifestem consilia philosophorum....”
[2604] Digby 68, 14th century, fols. 124-35, Liber Alkindii de
impressionibus terre et aeris accidentibus. CU Clare College 15 (Kk. 4,
2), c. 1280, fols. 8-13, “In nomine dei et eius laude Epistola Alkindi
de rebus aeribus et pluviis cum sermone aggregato et utili de arabico
in latinum translata.”
Steinschneider (1906) 32 gives the title as _De impressionibus
aeris_, and suggests that it is the same as a _De pluviis_ or
_De nubibus_, which seems to be the case, as they have the same
Incipit—Steinschneider (1905) 13—as does a _De imbribus_ in Digby 176,
14th century, fols. 61-63. Steinschneider also suggested that BN 7332,
_De impressionibus planetarum_ was probably the same treatise; and this
is shown to be true by the Explicit of Alkindi’s treatise in another
MS, Cotton Appendix VI, fol. 63v, “Explicit liber de impressionibus
planetarum secundum iacobum alkindi.” See also BN 7316, 7328, 7440,
7482.
The opening words of an anonymous _Tractatus de meteorologia_ in Vienna
2385, 13th century, fols. 46-49, show that it is the Alkindi. A very
similar treatise on weather prediction, _De subradiis planetarum_ or
_De pluviis_, is ascribed to Haly and exists in three Digby MSS (67,
fol. 12v; 93, fol. 183v; 147, fol. 117v) and in some other MSS noted
by Steinschneider. It belongs, I suspect, together with a brief _Haly
de dispositione aeris_ (Digby 92, fol. 5) which Steinschneider listed
separately.
[2605] Some notion of the number of these astrological treatises on the
weather may be had from the following group of them in a single MS.
Vienna 2436, 14th century,
fols. 134-6, “Finitur Hermanni liber de ymbribus et pluviis”
136-8, Iohannes Hispalensis, Tractatus de mutatione aeris
139, Haomar de pluviis
139-40, Idem de qualitate aeris et temporum
140, de pluvia, fulgure, tonitruis et vento
140-1, Dorochius, De hora pluvie et ventorum caloris et frigoris
141, Idem, De hora pluvie
141-2, Alkindus, alias Dorochius, De aeris qualitatibus
142, Idem, De imbribus
143, Jergis, De pluviis
198, 206, Iacobus Alkindus, Liber de significationibus planetarum et
eorum naturis, alias de pluviis.
[2606] Their titles are listed by Steinschneider (1906) 99; 31-3. We
may note BN 6978, 14th century, Incipit epistola Alkindi Achalis de
Baldac philosophi de futurorum scientia; Corpus Christi 254, fol. 191,
“de aspectibus”—a fragment from a 14th century MSS.
[2607] MSS of Robert’s translation of Alkindi’s _Judgments_ are
numerous in the Bodleian library: Digby 91, fol. 80-; Ashmole 179; 209;
369; 434; and extracts from it in other MSS. It opens, “Quamquam post
Euclidem.”
[2608] CLM 392, 15th century, fol. 80-; 489, 16th century, fols. 207-21.
[2609] O. Loth (1875), pp. 271-2; at 280-2 he gives the Latin of the
passage in question from Albumasar, following the Arabic of Alkindi at
273-9.
[2610] E. Wiedemann in _Journal f. praktische Chemie_, 1907, p. 73, _et
seq._; cited by Lippmann (1919) p. 399.
[2611] Bridges, _Opus Maius_, I, 262, note.
[2612] Steinschneider (1905), p. 47.
[2613] HL 21, 499-503.
[2614] _Spec. astron._ cap. 6. He gives the Incipit of the
_Experiments_ of Albumasar as “Scito horam introitus” which serves to
identify it with the following:
Amplon. Quarto 365, 12th century, fols. 1-18, liber experimentorum.
Ashmole 369-V, 13th century, fols. 103-23v, “... incipit liber in
revolutione annorum mundi. Perfectus est liber experimentorum....”
Ashmole 393, 15th century, fol. 95v, “Item Albumasar de revolutionibus
annorum mundi sive de experimentis....”
BN 16204, 13th century, pp. 302-333, “Revolutio annorum mundi....
Perfectus est liber experimentorum Albumasar....”
Arsenal 880, 15th century, fol. 1-.
Arsenal 1036, 14th century, fol. 104v.
Dijon 1045, 15th century, fol. 81-.
Other MSS containing _Experiments_ of Albumasar but where I am not sure
of the wording of the Incipit are:
Laud. Misc. 594, 14-15th century, fol. 123-, Liber experimentorum.
Harleian 1, fols. 31-41, de experimentis in revolutione annorum mundi.
CLM 51, 1487, and 1503.
Vienna 2436, 14th century, following John of Spain’s translation
of the _Introductorium magnum_ at fols. 1-85 and a _Liber magnarum
coniunctionum_ at fols. 144-98, comes at fol. 242, “Liber
experimentorum seu Capitula stellarum oblata regi magno Sarracenorum ab
Albumasore.” The Incipit here is “Dispositio est ut dicam ab ariete sic
initium” but the treatise is incomplete.
In some MS at Oxford which I cannot now identify the _Flores_ of
Albumasar close with the statement that the book of Experiments will
follow. A different hand then adds “The following work is Albumazar on
the revolutions of years,” while a third hand adds the explanation,
“And according to some authorities it and the book of experiments are
one,” which is the case.
In some MSS, however, another treatise on revolutions accompanies the
_Experiments_. In Amplon. Quarto 365 it is followed at fols. 18-27 by
_Sentencie de revolucione annorum_, while in Laud. Misc. 594 it is
preceded at fol. 106 by _Liber Albumasar de revolutionibus annorum
collectus a floribus antiquorum philosophorum_, which is the same as
the _Flores_.
[2615] The distinction between these various works is made quite clear
in BN 16204, 13th century, where at pp. 1-183 is John of Spain’s
translation of the _Liber introductorius maior_ in eight parts; at
183-302 the _Conjunctions_, also in eight parts; at 302-333 the
_Revolutio annorum mundi_ or _Liber experimentorum_; at 333-353 the
_Flores_, and at 353-369 the _De revolutione annorum in revolutione
nativitatum_, which opens “_Omne tempus breve est operandi...._” At
the same time the Explicit of this treatise bears witness to the ease
with which these works of Albumasar are confused, for it was at first
written, “_Explicit liber albumasar de revolutione annorum mundi_,”
and some other hand has crossed out this last word and substituted
“_nativitatis_.”
[2616] _Conciliator_, Diff. 156.
[2617] Laud. Misc. 594, 14-15th century, fols. 137-41, Liber Sadan,
sive Albumasar in Sadan. “Dixit Sadan, Audivi Albumayar dicentem quod
omnis vita viventium post Deum est sol et luna / Expliciunt excerpta de
secretis Albumasar.”
_Cat. cod. astrol. Graec._ V, i, 142, quotes from a 15th century MS,
“Expliciunt excerpta de secretis Albumasaris per Sadan discipulum cuius
(eius?) et vocatur liber Albumasaris in Sadan.”
The treatise, according to Steinschneider (1906), 36-8, is also found
in Amplon. Quarto 352.
CLM 826, 14th century, written and illuminated in Bohemia, fols. 27-33,
Tractatus de nativitatibus, “Dixit Zadan: audivi Albumazar dicentem....”
[2618] Steinschneider (1906), 36-38.
[2619] _Cat. cod. astrol. Graec._ V, i, 142. In Vienna MS 10583,
15th century, 99 fols., we find a “de revolutionibus nativitatum” by
Albumasar “greco in latinum.”
[2620] BN 7316, 15th century, #13, liber imbrium secundos Indos ...
authore Jafar; so too BN 7329, 15th century, #6; BN 7316 #16, de
mutatione temporum secundum Indos, seems, however, to be another
anonymous treatise on the same subject. Perhaps the following, although
not so listed in the catalogue, is by Albumasar.
Digby 194, fol. 147v- “Sapientes Indi de pluviis indicant secundum
lunam, considerantes ipsius mansiones / quum dominus aspectus aspicit
dominum vel est ei conjunctus.”
[2621] Corpus Christi 233, 13-15th century, fol. 122-“Japhar philosophi
et astrologi Aegyptii. Cum multa et varia de nubium congregatione
precepta Indorum traxit auctoritas....”
Cod. Cantab. Ii-I-13, “Incipit liber Gaphar de temporis mutatione
qui dicitur Geazar Babiloniensis. Universa astronomiae iudicia prout
Indorum....”
[2622] The text printed in 1507 and 1540 is Hugo’s translation. So
is Bodleian 463 (Bernard 2456) 14th century, fols. 20r-24r, “Incipit
liber imbrium editum a Iafar astrologo et a lenio et mercurio (Cilenio
Mercurio) correcto.” See also Savile 15 (Bernard 6561), Liber imbrium
ab antiquo Indorum astrologo nomine Jafar editus, deinde a Cylenio
Mercurio abbreviatus.
[2623] Digby 68, 14th century, fol. 116-“Ysagoga minor Japharis
mathematici in astronomiam per Adhelardum Bathoniencem ex Arabico
sumpta. Quicunque philosophie scienciam altiorem studio constanti
inquireris....”
Sloane 2030, fols. 83-86v, according to Haskins in EHR (1913), but
my notes, which it is now too late to verify, suggest that it is a
fragment occupying less than a page at fol. 87.
[2624] By Carra de Vaux in _Journal asiatique, 9e série_, I, 386, II,
152, 420, with a French translation; and by Nix, Leipzig, 1900, with a
German translation, also printed separately in 1894.
[2625] Galen, ed. Chart. X, 571; Constantinus Africanus, ed. Basel,
1536, pp. 317-21; Arnald of Villanova, _Opera_, Lyons, 1532, fol.
295, and also in other editions of his works; H. C. Agrippa, _Occult
Philosophy_, Lyons, 1600, pp. 637-40.
[2626] HL XXVIII, 78-9.
[2627] _Idem._
[2628] Additional 22719, 12th century, fol. 200v, “Quesivisti fili
karissime de incantatione adjuratione colli suspensione....” In view
of this and the citations of the work by Albertus Magnus who wrote
before Arnald of Villanova, I cannot agree with Steinschneider (1905),
pp. 6 and 12, in denying that Constantinus translated the work and in
ascribing the translation exclusively to Arnald.
[2629] Florence II, III, 214, 15th century, fols. 72-4, “Liber Unayn de
incantatione. Quesisti fili karissime....”
[2630] _De vegetabilibus_, V, ii, 6.
[2631] _Mineral._ II, ii, 7, and II, iii, 6.
[2632] _Mineral_. II, iii, 6 (ed. Borgnet, V, 55-6).
[2633] I am not certain as to this word: it is _sizamelon_ in one text,
_sesameleon_ in another.
[2634] “Quorum enim actio ex proprietate est non rationibus, unde sic
comprehendi non potest. Rationibus enim tantum comprehenduntur que
sensibus subministrantur. Aliquando ergo quedam substantie habent
proprietatem ratione incomprehensibilem propter sui subtilitatem et
sensibus non subministratum propter altitudinem sui magnam.” I doubt if
these last three words refer to the influence of the stars.
[2635] _Liber de differentia spiritus et animae_, or _De differentia
inter animam et spiritum_. The prologue opens: “Interrogasti me—honoret
te Deus!—de differentia....”
[2636] Steinschneider (1866), p. 404; (1905), p. 43, “wovon ich das
Original in Gotha 1158 erkannte.“
[2637] So in Corpus Christi 114, late 13th century, fol. 229, and at
Paris in the following MSS of the 13th or 14th century mostly: BN 6319,
#11; 6322, #11; 6323, #6; 6323A; 6325, #17; 6567A; 6569; 8247; 16082;
16083; 16088; 16142; 16490.
[2638] Specific illustrations of such confusions between the two names
in the MSS are: BN 6296, 14th century, #15, “... authore filio Lucae
Medici Constabolo”; Brussels, Library of Dukes of Burgundy 2784,
12th century, “Constaben”; Sloane 2454, late 13th century, “Liber
differentiae inter animam et spiritum quem Constantinus Luce amico suo
scriptori Regis edidit.”
[2639] Constantinus Africanus, _Opera_, Basel, 1536, pp. 307-17, “Qui
voluerit scire differentiam, que est inter duas res .../ ... Hec igitur
de differentiis spiritus et anime tibi dicta sufficiant, valeto.”
Edited more recently by S. Barach, Innsbruck, 1878, pp. 120-39.
[2640] _Theorica_, III, 12.
[2641] Corpus Christi 154, late 13th century, pp. 356-74, ascribed to
Augustine in both Titulus and Explicit.
[2642] S. Marco 179, 14th century, fols. 57-9, 83, Liber Ysaac de
differentia spiritus et animae.
[2643] CU Gonville and Caius 109, 13th century, fols. 1-6v, “Avicenna
de differencia spiritus et anime.”
[2644] So says Coxe, anent Corpus Christi 114, and Steinschneider
(1905), p. 43.
[2645] Migne, PL 40, 779-832.
[2646] By Trithemius; but earlier so cited by Vincent of Beauvais (PL
40, 779-80). See also Exon. 23, 13th century, fol. 196v.
[2647] Migne, PL 40, 779-80.
[2648] Both passages were excerpted by Vincent of Beauvais, _Speculum
naturale_, XXIX, 41.
[2649] De Renzi (1852-9) IV, 189; Petrocellus is very brief on the
cells of the brain.
[2650] Singer (1917), pp. 45 and 51, has noted that Hildegard’s
description of the brain as divided into three chambers is anteceded
by the _Liber de humana natura_ of Constantinus, and contained “in the
writings of St. Augustine.”
[2651] PL 40, 795, cap. 22.
[2652] _De proprietatibus rerum_, III, 10 and 16; V, 3.
[2653] Similarly E. G. Browne (1921), p. 123, writing of Arabian
medicine and Avicenna, says, “Corresponding with the five external
senses, taste, touch, hearing, smelling, and seeing, are the five
internal senses, of which the first and second, the compound sense (or
‘sensus communis’) and the imagination, are located in the anterior
ventricle of the brain; the third and fourth, the co-ordinating and
emotional faculties, in the mid-brain; and the fifth, the memory, in
the hind-brain.” Galen had somewhat similar ideas.
[2654] _De Genesi ad litteram_, VII, 18 (PL 34, 364).
[2655] The fullest treatment of him will be found in D. A. Chwolson,
_Die Ssabier und der Ssabismus_, Petrograd, 1856, 2 vols., _passim_.
For a list of his works see Steinschneider. _Zeitschrift f. Math._,
XVIII, 331-38.
[2656] There is some difficulty with these dates or their Arabic
equivalents, because we are not certain whether the length of his life
is given in lunar or solar years: see Chwolson, I, 532-3, 547-8.
[2657] Bridges, I, 394.
[2658] Carra de Vaux, _Avicenne_, Paris, 1900, p. 68.
[2659] Chwolson, II, 406, 422, 431, 440, 453, 610, 703.
[2660] _Ibid._, I. 741; II, 7, 258, 386, 677, etc.
[2661] Chwolson, II, 386-97, 500, 525, 530, 676.
[2662] _Ibid._, I, 737.
[2663] _Ibid._, II, 30, 373.
[2664] _Ibid._, II, 411, 658, 839.
[2665] _Ibid._, II, 253.
[2666] _Ibid._, I, 738.
[2667] _Ibid._, I, 733-4.
[2668] _Ibid._, II, 19, 148, 150.
[2669] _Ibid._, II, 21, 138-9.
[2670] _Ibid._, I, 526; II, 141.
[2671] Quoted by Bishop Gregory Bar-hebraeus in his _Syrian Chronicle_:
Chwolson, I, 177-80.
[2672] Chwolson, I, 195; II, 623.
[2673] _Ibid._, I, 482-3.
[2674] Again there seems to be uncertainty as to dates, since the
Arabic sources name a caliph who was not contemporary with the
philosopher in question: Chwolson, I, 548-9.
[2675] Chwolson, I, 485. Chwolson perhaps lays himself open a little to
the charge of arguing in a circle, since Thebit’s writings are his main
source concerning Sabianism.
[2676] _Ibid._, I, 553-64, for a list of his translations of, extracts
from, and commentaries upon Greek works.
[2677] _Ibid._, I, 484.
[2678] BN 10260, 16th century, “Incipit liber Karastoni de ponderibus
.../ ... editus a Thebit filio Core.” Also in BN 7377B, 14-15th
century, #3; 7424, 14th century, #6; Vienna 5203, 15th century, fols.
172-80. For other MSS see Björnbo (1911) 140.
[2679] Harleian 13, fol. 118-Thebit de motu octave spere; fol.
120v- Liber Thebith ben Corath de his qui indigent expositione
antequam legitur Almagestum; 123- Liber Thebit de ymaginatione spere
et circulorum eius diversorum; 124v- Liber Thebith de quantitatibus
stellarum et planetarum.
Also in Harl. 3647, #11-14; Tanner 192, 14th century, fol. 103-; BN
7195, 14th century, #12-15; Magliabech. XI-117, 14th century; CUL 1767
(Ii. III, 3) 1276 A. D., fols. 86-96; and many other MSS.
[2680] Delambre (1819) 73.
[2681] Chwolson, I, 551.
[2682] BN 6514, #10, _Thebit de alchymia_; Amplon. Quarto 312, written
before 1323 A. D., fol. 29, _Notule Thebith contra alchimiam_.
[2683] A work on judgments is ascribed to him in a Munich MS, CLM 588,
14th century, fol. 189- _Thebites de iudiciis_; followed by, 220- _Liber
iudicialis Ptolomei_, 233- _Libellus de iudiciis_, and 238- _Modus
iudicandi_. The treatise on fifteen stars, fifteen herbs, and fifteen
stones, which as we have seen is usually ascribed to Hermes or Enoch,
is attributed to Thebit in at least one MS, BN 7337, page 129-.
[2684] I, 551.
[2685] Lyons 328, fols. 70-74, Liber prestigiorum Thebidis (Elbidis)
secundum Ptolemeum et Hermetem per Adhelardum bathoniensem translatus,
opening, “Quicunque geometria atque philosopia peritus astronomiae
expers fuerit ociosus est.” In this MS the treatise closes with the
words, “ut prestigiorum artifex facultate non decidat.” This seems to
be the only MS known where the translation is ascribed to Adelard of
Bath. It seems to have once been part of Avranches 235, 12th century,
where the same title is listed in the table of contents. Haskins, in
EHR (1911) 495, fails to identify the work, calling it “a treatise
on horoscopes.” It is to be noted, however, that Albertus Magnus in
listing bad necromantic books on images in the _Speculum astronomiae_
(cap. xi, Borgnet, X, 641) gives the same Incipit for a _liber
praestigiorum_ by Hermes, “Qui geometriae aut philosophiae peritus,
expers astronomiae fuerit ...” Undoubtedly the two were the same.
[2686] Of John of Seville’s translation the MSS are more numerous.
The following will serve as a representative. Royal 12-C-XVIII, 14th
century, fols. 10v-12r, “Dixit thebyth bencorat et dixit aristoteles
qui philosophiam et geometriam exercet et omnem scientiam legit et
ab astronomia vacuus fuerit erit occupatus et vacuus quod dignior
geometria et altior philosophia est ymaginum scientia. / Explicit
tractatus de imaginibus Thebith Bencorath translatus a Iohanne
Hyspalensi atque Limiensi in Limia ex Arabico in Latinum. Sit laus deo
maximo.”
This is the version cited by Michael Scot in his _Liber Introductorius_
(Bodleian 266, fol. 200) where he gives the Incipit, “Dixerunt enim
thebith benchorath et aristoteles quod si quis philosophiam ...,” etc.,
substantially as above.
But now comes a good joke on Albertus, who has listed among good
astronomical books of images (_Speculum astronomiae_, cap. xi, Borgnet,
p. 642) the work of “Thebith eben chorath” opening “Dixit A. qui
philosophiam ...” which of course is that just mentioned. Thus he
condemns one translation of the same book and approves the other; is
he perhaps having some fun at the expense of the opponents of both
astrology and necromancy?
It will be noted that it is Aristotle, rather than Hermes or Ptolemy,
who is cited at the start in John of Seville’s translation. I therefore
am uncertain whether Chwolson has our treatise in mind, when he speaks
of Thebit’s commenting upon “eine pseudohermetische Schrift über
Talismane u.s.w.” In the printed text of 1559 Aristotle and Ptolemy are
cited in the first paragraph, but in the MSS Aristotle is cited twice.
[2687] Some other MSS differ slightly from the foregoing in their
opening words, but perhaps not enough to suggest a third translation:
Ashmole 346, 16th century, fols. 113-15v, “Incipit liber de ymaginibus
secundum Thebit. In nomine pii et misericordis Dei. Dixit Thebit qui
geometrie aut Philosophie expers fuerit.”
Bodleian 463 (Bernard 2456), written in Spain, 14th century, fols.
75r-75v, “Dixit thebit bencorat Ar. qui legit phylosophiam et
geumetriam et omnem scientiam et alienus fuerit ab astronomia erit
impeditus vel occupatus.”
The following MSS ascribe the translation to John of Spain and have the
usual opening words, “Dixit Thebit ben Corat, Dixit Aristoteles, qui
philosophiam, etc.”
Digby 194, 15th century, fol. 145v-.
S. Marco XI-102, 14th century, fols. 150-53.
Berlin 963, 15th century, fol. 140- “Dixit thebit ben corach Cum
volueris operari de ymaginibus,” but then at fol. 199, with the usual
Incipit.
Harleian 80 has the first part missing but ends, fol. 76r, like John’s
translation.
Still other MSS are:
Harleian 3647, 13th century.
Sloane 3846, fols. 86v-93; 3847; and 3883, fols. 87-93: all three 17th
century.
Amplon. Quarto 174, 14th century, fols. 120-1.
BN 7282, 15th century, #4, interprete Joanne Hispalensi.
Berlin 964, 15th century, fols. 213-5.
Vienna 2378, 14th century, fols. 41-63.
CLM 27, 14-15th century, fols. 71-77; 59, 15th century, fols. 239-43.
Florence II-iii-214, 15th century, fols. 1-4, “Incipit liber Thebit
Benchorac de scientia omigarum et imaginum.(D) ixit Aristotiles qui.”
[2688] _De tribus imaginibus magicis_, Frankfurt, 1559.
[2689] _Mineral._ II, iii, 3.
[2690] Magliabech. XX-20, fol. 12r; Sloane 1305, fol. 19r.
[2691] _Conciliator_, Diff. X., fol. 16GH, in ed. Venice, 1526.
[2692] _Commentary on the Sphere_, cap. 3.
[2693] Also given as Muhammad ibn Zakariya (Abu Bakr) ar-Razi and Abu
Bekr Mohammed ben Zachariah.
[2694] Withington in his _Medical History_, 1894, gives the date as
932, perhaps by a misprint.
[2695] Ibn Abi Usaibi’a (1203-1269, himself a physician and son of an
oculist) “Sources of Information concerning Classes of Physicians,”
compiled at Damascus, 1245-1246, ed. by Müller, Cairo, 1882; and Ibn
Khallikan (1211-1282), “Obituaries of Men of Note,” written between
1256 and 1274.
For these titles and most of the general account of the life and works
of Rasis which follows I am indebted to G. S. A. Ranking’s “The Life
and Works of Rhazes,” pp. 237-68, in _Transactions of the Seventeenth
International Congress of Medicine, Section XXIII_, London, 1913.
[2696] The list is reproduced by Ranking (1913) in Arabic and Latin,
largely on the basis of a MS at the University of Glasgow, which
contains a Latin translation by a Greek priest, who died in 1729, of
the Arabic work of Usaibi’a, or part of it, mentioned in the previous
note: Hunterian Library, MS 44, fols. 1-19v.
[2697] I have examined both these editions at the British Museum;
Withington does not mention them in his _History of Medicine_, but
cites editions of the _Continens_, Venice, 1542, and _Opera Parva_,
1510, and a modern edition (1858) by the Sydenham Society of _On the
Small Pox and Measles_. The pages are not numbered in the edition of
1481, so that I shall not be able to give exact references to them.
[2698] This was sometimes reproduced separately: see Wolfenbüttel 2885,
15th century, fol. 1, Phisonomia Rasis, fol. 2, Phisonomia Aristetelis,
Rasis et Philomenis, summorum magistrorum in philosophia.
[2699] It occupies but a little over three pages in the 1481 edition.
Since in the middle of the treatise we read “Magister rasis fecit
cauterizari quidem artheticum ...,” etc., it is perhaps by a disciple
rather than Rasis himself.
[2700] 79, _Dissertatio de causis quae plerorumque hominum animos a
praestantissimis ad viliores quosque medicos solent deflectere_.
124, _Liber, Quod medicus acutus non sit ille qui possit omnes curare
morbos quoniam hoc non est in hominum potestate_ ...,
125, _Epistola, Quod artifex omnibus numeris absolutus in quacumque
arte non existat nedum in medicina speciatim: et de causa cur imperiti
medici, vulgus, et etiam mulieres in civitatibus, foeliciores sint in
sanandis quibusdam morbis quam viri doctissimi et de excusatione medici
hoc propter_.
There appears to be a German translation by Steinschneider of this work
by Rasis on the success of quacks and charlatans in _Virchow’s Archiv
f. Pathologische Anatomie_, XXXVI, 570-86.
[2701] Ranking (1913), #180, 15, 138, 163.
[2702] _Ibid._, #137; also 145, _Supplementum libris Plutarchi_.
[2703] _Ibid._ #126, _Liber, De probatis et experientia compertis in
arte medica; per modum syntagmatis est digestus_. #205, _Liber, Quod in
morbis qui determinari atque explicari non possunt oporteat ut medicus
sit assiduus apud aegrotantem et debeat uti experimentis ad illos
cognoscendos. Et de medici fluctatione_.
[2704] _Ibid._ #25, 26, 32-35, 38, 40. I should guess that 201,
_Arcanum arcanorum de sapientia_, was the same as 35, _Arcanum
arcanorum_.
[2705] _Ibid._ #40, _Responsio ad philosophum el-Kendi eo quod artem
al-Chymi in impossibili posuerit_.
[2706] Berthelot (1893), I, 68 and 286-7. On the alchemy of Rasis see
further in this same volume the chapter, _L’Alchimie de Rasis et du
Pseudo-Aristote_.
[2707] BN 6514 and 7156.
[2708] Riccardian 119, fol. 35v, “Incipit liber luminis luminum
translatus a magistro michahele scotto philosopho.” Printed by J. Wood
Brown (1897), p. 240 _et seq._
[2709] Lippmann (1919), p. 400, citing the _Biographies_ of Albaihaqi
(1105-1169).
[2710] Ranking, #8.
[2711] _Ibid._ #107.
[2712] Ranking, #134. Other titles in mathematics and astronomy are:
73, _Liber de sphaeris et mensuris compendiosis_; 128, _De septem
planetis et de sapientia_; 155, _De quadrato in mathesi epistola_; also
109 and 110.
[2713] _Ibid._ #13.
[2714] _Ibid._ #51.
[2715] _Ibid._ #158, _De necessitate precationis_.
[2716] Printed as the Lapidary of Aristotle, Merseburg, 1473, p. 2.
[2717] See De la Ville de Mirmont, _L’Astrologie chez les
Gallo-Romains_, Bordeaux, 1904; also published in _Revue des Études
anciennes_, 1902, p. 115-; 1903, p. 255-; 1906, p. 128-.
[2718] Goujet (1737), p. 50; cited by C. Jourdain (1838), pp. 28-9.
[2719] HL IV, 274-5; V, 182-3; VI, 9-10.
[2720] Palat. Lat. 487, fol. 40, opening, “Nouo et insolito siderum
ortu infausta quaedam uel tristitia potius quam laeta uel prospera
miseris uentura significari mortalibus pene omnia ueterum aestimauit
auctoritas.”
[2721] HL VII, 137.
[2722] Ernest Wickersheimer, _Figures médico-astrologiques des
neuvième, dixième et onzième siècles_, in _Transactions of the
Seventeenth International Congress of Medicine, Section XXIII, History
of Medicine_, London, 1913, p. 313 _et seq._ I have not seen A. Fischer
_Aberglaube unter den Angelsachsen_, Meiningen, 1891, or M. Förster,
_Die Kleinlitteratur des Aberglaubens im Altenglischen_, in _Archiv. f.
d. Studium d. Neuer. Sprachen_, vol. 110, pp. 346-58.
[2723] Charles Singer, _Studies in the History and Method of Science_,
Oxford, 1917, Plate XV, opposite p. 40, reproduces this illumination.
The MS, BN 7028, seems to have once belonged to the abbey of St. Hilary
at Poitiers.
[2724] Besides those in France mentioned by Wickersheimer may be noted
two of the tenth century at Munich: CLM 18629, fol. 105, “Tabula
cosmica cum nominibus ventorum, germanicorum quoque”; CLM 18764, fols.
79-80, “Schema de genitura mundi.” Also Vatic. Lat. 645, 9th century,
fol. 66, Ventorum imagines et in circulo Adam in medio ferarum; fol.
66v, Planetarum figura. This same MS contains a conjuration written in
a later hand of the eleventh or twelfth century: fol. 4v, “In nomine
patris.... Tres angeli ambulaverunt in monte....”
For such an astrological diagram in an Arabic work of the tenth century
see E. G. Browne (1921), 117-8.
[2725] Amiens, fonds Lescalopier, 2, 11th century, fols. 1-12.
[2726] For instance, for February, “Bibe agrimoniam et apii semen;
oculos turbulentos sanare debes”: for March, “Merum dulce primum bibe,
assum balneum usita, sanguinem non minuas, ruta et levestico utere.”
[2727] _Ibid._, fols. 11 and 19.
[2728] Pembroke 278, early 14th century, fol. 25, “Compotus est
sciencia considerans tempora.”
[2729] BN nouv. acq. 1616, 14 leaves.
[2730] BN 7299A.
[2731] BN 7299A, fols. 35v, 37v, 56r.
[2732] Notker is especially famed for his translations with learned
commentaries from Latin into German, of which five are extant, namely:
_The Consolation of Philosophy_ of Boethius, _The Marriage of Mercury
and Philology_ of Martianus Capella, the _Psalter_, and Aristotle,
_De categoriis_ and _De interpretatione_: see Piper, _Die Schriften
Notkers_, Freiburg, 1882-1883, vols. I-III.
[2733] BN nouv. acq. 229, fols. 10v-14v. _Notker erkenhardo discipulo
de IIII questionibus compoti._ It seems not to have been printed.
[2734] Cotton Tiberius A, III, a MS written in various hands before
the Norman conquest, partly in Latin and partly in Anglo-Saxon, and
containing among other things the Colloquy of Aelfric. Our item occurs
at fol. 34r in Latin with an Anglo-Saxon interlinear version, and at
fol. 39v in Anglo-Saxon only.
Cotton Titus D, XXVI, 10th century, fols. 10v-11v, gives a slightly
different version for some days of the week.
[2735] Harleian 3017, 10th century, fols. 63r-64v, CLM 6382, 11th
century, fol. 42, Supputatio Esdrae; Incipit, “Kal. Jan. si fuerint
dominico die hiems bona erit.”
Vatican, Palat. Lat. 235, 10-11th century, fol. 39, “Subputatio quam
subputavit Esdras in templo Hierusalem,” opening, “Si in prima feria
fuerint kl. Ianuarii hiemps bona erit.”
Also found in Egerton 821, fol. 1r, which is of the twelfth century and
adds a more elaborate method of divination according to what planet
rules the first hour of the first night of January and which of its 28
mansions the moon is in.
CLM 9921, 12th century, fol. 1, is a calendar with verses beginning,
“Jani prima dies et septima fine timetur.”
[2736] Sloane 475, this portion perhaps 11th century, fol. 217r. Other
MSS of later date than the period we are now considering are: Harleian
2258, fol. 191, “prognostica a die nativitatis Domini a luna et somniis
petita,” predictions from Christmas, the moon, and dreams. CUL 1338,
15th century, fol. 65v, Prognostications derived from the day on which
Christmas falls (in Latin); fol. 74v, Prognostications drawn from the
day of the week on which the year commences. CU Trinity 1109, 14th
century, fol. 148, “Prognostica anni sequentis ex die natalium Domini.”
[2737] BN nouv. acq. 1616, 9th century, fol. 12v. Similar later MSS are:
Digby 86, 13th century, fols. 32-4, Prognosticatio ex vento in nocte
Natalis Domini, and fols. 40v-41r, “Les singnes del jour de Nouel,”
predictions in French according to the day of the week on which
Christmas falls.
Digby 88, 15th century, fol. 77, “Howe all ye yere ys rewlyde by the
day that Christemas day fallythe on,” and fol. 40r, “Prognostication
from the sight of the sun on Christmas and the ten days following”
(Prognosticatio ex visione solis in die Natalis Domini et in decem
diebus subsequentibus), and fol. 75, a poem of prognostications for
Christmas day. This same MS contains a large number of other brief
anonymous treatises in the fields of astrology and divination.
[2738] Titus D, XXVI, fol. 9v. Tiberius A, III, fols. 38r and 35r.
Cockayne, _Leechdoms_ etc., III, 150-295, in RS vol. 35, published this
and a number of other extracts from Tiberius A, III, and other early
English MSS.
Vienna 2245, 12th century, fols. 59r-69v are devoted to various
prognostications, beginning with, “Three days are to be observed above
all others,” and ending with, “Thunder at dawn signifies the birth of a
king.” A dream book by Daniel follows at fols. 69v-75r.
[2739] Vatican Palat. Lat. 235, fol. 40, “In mense Ianuario si
tonitru fuerit.” In Egerton 821, 12th century, the significance of
thunder is given according to the twelve signs of the zodiac, and we
are told of what the Egyptians write, and of famine in Babylon. In
CUL 1687, 13-14th century, fols. 68v-69r, Latin verses containing
prognostications concerning thunder are followed by “a list of the
number of quarters of flour, beer, etc., used in the year _at the
monastery_” and by “a note on the symbolism of the pastoral staff.”
[2740] Combined with the method by the day of the week in BN 7299A,
12th century, fol. 37v.
[2741] Tiberius A, III, fol. 63r; Vatican Palat. Lat. 235, fol. 40.
[2742] Tiberius A, III, fol. 38v.
[2743] Sloane 475, fol. 135v.
[2744] Sloane 475, fol. 133r. The method is almost identical with that
of the spheres of life and death, of which we shall speak presently. In
CU Trinity 987, _The Canterbury Psalter_, about 1150 A. D., the value
assigned _Dies Solis_ is 24.
[2745] Vatic. Palat. Lat. 235, fol. 40, “De lunae observatione: Luna I
omnibus rebus agendis utilis.”
Tiberius A, III, fol. 63r, where, however, such parts of the day as
morning and evening are further distinguished.
Vatic. Palat. Lat. 485, 9th century, fol. 15v, “Ad sanguinem
minuendum,” merely states which days of the moon are favorable or
unfavorable for blood-letting.
St. John’s 17, 1110 A. D., fol. 4, Luna quibus diebus bona est et
quibus non; fol. 154v, a table of lucky and unlucky numbers.
[2746] Harleian 3017, fol. 58v; the Incipit states that it is by the
same author as the preceding Sphere of Pythagoras and Apuleius.
Titus D, XXVI, fol. 8.
Cotton Caligula A, XV, 10th century, fol. 121v, Latin and Anglo-Saxon.
Egerton 821, fol. 32r, is a twelfth century instance.
The method seems combined or confused with the Egyptian days in Vatic.
Palat. Lat. 485, 9th century, fol. 13v, “Dies aegyptiaci. Signa in
quibus aegrotus an periclitare aut evadere non potest,” but opening,
“Luna I. qui ceciderit in infirmitatem difficile euadit.”
[2747] Harleian 3017, fol. 58v, “Incipit lunarium sancti danihel de
nativitate infantium. Luna I qui fuerit natus vitalis erit; Luna II,
mediocris erit ... Luna IIII, tractator regum erit ... Luna XII,
religiosus erit ... Luna XXX, negotias multas tractabit.”
Tiberius A, III, fols. 63r and 34v.
Titus D, XXVI, fols. 7v and 6v.
[2748] Tiberius A, III, fol. 33v. Titus D, XXVI, fol. 9r. CLM 6382,
11th century, fol. 42, De somni ueris uel mendosis quidam incipiunt in
aetatibus lunae exploratis.
[2749] Tiberius A, III, fols. 30v-33v, “Finiunt somnia danielis
prophete.”
Sloane 475, fols. 211-6, is almost identical, but I believe does not
mention Daniel as its author.
Vatic. Palat. Lat. 235, fol. 39v.
BN nouv. acq. 1616, 9th century, is roughly similar but names no author
and does not distinguish the fates of boys and girls. It usually
states whether slaves who run away and thieves who steal on the day
in question will be caught or escape. It opens and closes thus: “Luna
prima qui incenditur in ipsa sanabitur et bona et in omnibus dare et
accipere et nubere et navigare in mare et vendere et emere et omnis
quicumque fugerit in ipsa aut servus aut liber non poterit sed capitur
aut qui incendit incendio sanabitur (presumably an allusion to the
medical practice of cauterization) et qui natus fuerit vitalis erit
.../ ... Luna XXX bona est ambulare in piscatione et qui fugit post
multos annos revertitur in loco suo et qui natus fuerit dives erit et
honoratissimus erit et qui incadit aut manducet aut non vivet periculo
mortis habebit.”
Titus D, XXVII, fols. 22-25r, “judicia de diebus quibusdam cuiusque
mensis”; fols. 27-9, “argumentum lunare, quando et qualiter observentur
tempora ad res agendas.”
Of the twelfth century, Vienna 2532, fols. 55-9, “Luna I. Hec dies
omnibus egrotantibus utilis est .../ ... Puer natus negotia multa
sectabit.”
[2750] Sloane 2461, end of 13th century, fols. 62-4. No Biblical
character is mentioned for the fifth and sixth days, but we are told
that on the seventh day of the moon Abel was slain by Cain.
BN 3660A, 16th century, fols. 53r-57r, ascribes the birth of
Nebuchadnezzar to the fifth day, leaves the sixth blank, has Abel slain
on the seventh, Methusaleh born on the eighth, Lamech on the ninth, and
so on.
Egerton 821, 12th century, fol. 12r, “Natus est Samuel propheta....”
Digby 88, 15th century, fol. 62r, has English verses beginning:
“God made Adam the fyrst day of the moone,
And the second day Eve good dedis to doone.”
A similar poem occurs at fol. 64 of the same MS and in Ashmole 189,
fol. 213v.
[2751] Ashmole 361, mid 14th century, fols. 156v-158v, “Iste sunt
lunaciones quas Adam primus homo disposuit secundum veram experientiam
quam etiam suis filiis tradidit et quam maxime Abel et ceteris de
posteritate ad quos etiam concordavit Daniel propheta ...”; fol. 159,
“Modo agitur de numero lune ad videndum que sit bona vel que mala et
usum istarum lunacionum invenerunt Adam et Daniel propheta.”
[2752] Canon. Misc. 517, fol. 35r, “Incipit scientia edita ab edri
philosopho astrologo et medico.”
[2753] BN 3660A, fols. 53r-57r. In the catalogue of Ashburnham MSS
at Florence the name of Giovannino di Graziano is connected with a
moon-book in Ashburnham 130, 13-15th century, fols. 25-6, “Luna prima
Adam natus fuit....” But perhaps this name should go only with some
prognostications, exorcisms, and recipes which occur at the close of
the predictions for the thirty days of the moon.
[2754] Ed. Leemans, 1833-1885.
[2755] Bouché-Leclercq (1899), 537-42; (1879-1882), I, 258-65.
Berthelot, _Alchimistes grecs_ (1888), I, 86-90. K. Sudhoff (1902), pp.
4-6.
[2756] Arundel 319, 13th century, fol. 2r, Versus de faustis vel
infaustis nominibus pugnantium, is a medieval Latin example.
[2757] Printed among treatises of dubious or spurious authorship with
Bede’s works, Migne, PL 90, 963-6; and more recently in Riess’ edition
of the fragments of Nechepso and Petosiris (_Philologus_, Suppl. VI,
1891-1893, pp. 382-3) from Cod. Laur. XXXVIII, 24, 9-10th century, fol.
174v. Wickersheimer (1913), pp. 315-7, notes BN 17868, 10th century,
fol. 13. For other MSS see Appendix I to this chapter.
[2758] Printed by Paul Lehmann, _Apuleiusfragmente_, _Hermes_ XLIX
(1914), 612-20. For a list of some MSS of it see Appendix I at the
close of this chapter.
[2759] _Polycraticus_ I, 13, ed. Webb, I, 54. Mr. Webb in a note refers
to an article in a German periodical (K. Gillert, _Neues Archiv d.
Gesellschaft f. ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde_, V, 254) concerning
a MS of the _Sphere of Pythagoras_ preserved at Petrograd, but says
nothing of the MSS in the British Museum listed in Appendix I to this
chapter,—a good illustration of the unnecessary obsequiousness of
English towards German scholarship which has frequently prevailed in
the past.
[2760] A few of them will be found listed in Appendix I to this chapter.
[2761] Egerton 821, 12th century, fol. 15r, “Hec est spera quod fecit
sanctus Donatus. Quicumque egrotare incipit....” It is followed on the
next page by the usual figure for the _Sphere of Apuleius_.
[2762] Harleian 1735; the passages referred to in the following account
occur at fols. 36v, 41, 43, 29, 44v, 40, and 39v respectively.
[2763] See Appendix II to this chapter for a list of MSS other than
those mentioned in the following notes.
[2764] BN nouv. acq. 1616, 9th century, fol. 12r.
[2765] Digby 63, end of 9th century, fol. 36.
[2766] _Ibid._, fols. 40-5.
[2767] CU Trinity 1369, 11th century, fol. iv.
[2768] BN 7299A, 12th century, fol. 37v.
[2769] For further information on this point see Budge, _Egyptian
Magic_, 1899, pp. 225-8; Webster, _Rest Days_, 1916, pp. 295-7.
[2770] Webster (1916), pp. 300-301, however, speaks of 30 in a 14th
century MS, 32 in an English MS of Henry VI’s reign, and 31 in another
15th century MS.
[2771] Cited by Bouché-Leclercq, _L’Astrologie grecque_, 1899, pp.
485-6, 623.
[2772] _De proprietatibus rerum_, 1488, Lindelbach, Heidelberg,
IX, 20. This is not to say, however, that they always appear in
medieval calendars; I did not find them in any of the 14th and 15th
century calendars from Apulia and Iapygia published by G. M. Giovene,
_Kalendaria vetera_, Naples, 1828. His calendars consist of little save
saints’ days, although in some of them the beginning of dog-days is
marked and when the sun enters each sign of the zodiac.
[2773] “Black earth” was the name given by the Egyptians to their
country.
[2774] _Imago mundi_, II, 109.
[2775] _Speculum naturale_, XVI, 83, printed by Anth. Koburger,
Nürnberg, 1485.
[2776] HL 25, 329. My impression is that some medieval astronomers also
denied to these Egyptian days any astrological importance, since they
always came upon the same days of the months without reference to the
phases of the moon or courses of the other planets: but I cannot put my
hand on such passages.
[2777] And is approvingly cited to that effect by Arnald of Villanova,
_Regulae generales curationis morborum. Doctrina IV_.
[2778] Ashmole 361, mid 14th century, fols. 158v-159.
[2779] BN 7337, 14-15th century, p. 75. Ad-Damîrî states in his
zoological lexicon, (ed. A. S. G. Jayaker, 1906, I, 134) that Mohammed
is reported to have said, “Be cautious of twelve days in the year,
because they are such as cause the loss of property and bring on
disgrace or dishonor.”
[2780] M. Hamilton, _Greek Saints and Their Festivals_, 1910, p. 187,
states that “in all parts of (modern) Greece on certain days of August
and March it is considered necessary to abstain from particular kinds
of work in order to avoid disaster.”
[2781] Mention may perhaps be made in this connection of the “Tobias
nights,” three nights of abstinence which newly wedded couples were
sometimes accustomed to observe in the middle ages in order to defeat
the demons. The practice is mentioned in the Vulgate, but not in
most ancient versions of the _Book of Tobit_. In 1409 the citizens
of Abbeville won a lawsuit with the bishop of Amiens who claimed the
right to grant dispensations from the observance of the Tobias nights
and required that fees be paid him for that purpose. See J. G. Frazer
(1918), I, 498-520, where analogous practices of primitive tribes are
listed.
[2782] Bateson, _Medieval England_, 1904, p. 72; I have in the main
followed the fuller account in DNB “Gerard,” from which the previous
quotation is taken. William of Malmesbury, _Gesta Pontificum Anglorum_,
III, 118 (ed. N. E. S. A. Hamilton, RS, vol. 52, 1870) does not say
definitely that the book found under Gerard’s pillow was Firmicus.
Also he says nothing of boys stoning the bier or of Gerard’s enemies
interpreting his death as a divine judgment, and in his autograph copy
of the _Gesta Pontificum_ he afterwards erased the statements that
rumor accused Gerard of many crimes and lusts, and that he was said
to practice sorcery because he read Julius Firmicus on the sly before
the midday hours, and that people say that a book of curious arts
was found beneath his pillow when he died. This, the late medieval
chroniclers say, was Firmicus: see Ranulf Higden, ed. Lumby, VII, 420,
and Knyghton, ed. Twysden, X, SS., 2375.
[2783] _Firmicus Maternus_, ed. Kroll et Skutsch, II (1913), p. iv;
and F. Liebermann, ed. _Quadripartitus_, Halle, 1892, p. 36, and _Die
Gesetze der Angelsachsen_, Halle, 1903-1906, I, 548.
[2784] C. Jourdain, _Nicolas Oresme et les astrologues à la cour de
Charles V_, in _Revue des Questions Historiques_, 1875, p. 136.
[2785] English translation, ed. of 1898, p. 508.
[2786] N. Valois (1880), p. 305.
[2787] Additional 17,808, a narrow folio in vellum with all the
treatises written in the same large, plain hand with few abbreviations.
A considerable part of the MS is occupied by the work on music of Guido
of Arezzo (c. 995-1050). This MS is not noted by Wickersheimer or by
Bubnov, although it includes treatises on the abacus and the astrolabe
which are perhaps by Gerbert.
[2788] BN 17,868, from the chapter of Notre Dame of Paris, 21 leaves.
Wickersheimer (1913), 321-3, states that it has all the marks of the
writing of the tenth century: Delisle so dated it. Bubnov (1899),
LXVII, regards fols. 14r _et seq._ as by a slightly older hand than the
first portion.
[2789] Bubnov (1899), 124-6, note.
[2790] CLM 560, described in Bubnov, _Gerberti opera mathematica_,
1899, p. xli.
[2791] _Ibid._, fols. 16r-19, Fragmentum libelli de astrolabio a quodam
ex Arabico versi. Incipit, “Ad intimas summe phylosophie disciplinas et
sublimia ipsius perfectionis archisteria.” Printed by Bubnov (1899),
pp. 370-75.
[2792] Incipit “Quicumque astronomiam peritiam disciplinae”; the
printed editions insert a _discere_ after _astronomiam_, but it has
not been there in the MSS which I have seen and is not needed. Printed
by Pez, _Thesaurus Anecdotorum Noviss._ III, ii, 109-30, (1721) and
incorrectly ascribed by him to Hermannus Contractus, because it often
occurs in the MSS together with another treatise on the astrolabe by a
“Herimannus Christi pauperum peripsima et philosophiae tyronum asello
imo limace tardior assecla.” Of this last we shall have more to say
presently. The edition of Pez reappears in Migne, PL vol. 143. Bubnov
(1899), 114-47, gives a new edition, and at pp. 109-13 a list of the
MSS of the work, in which, however, he fails to note the following:
and they are also absent from his general index of 153 codices at
pp. xvii-xc. BM Additional MS 17808, 11th century, fols. 73v-79r,
under the title as in other MSS of “Regulae ex libris Ptolomei regis
de compositione astrolapsus.” Yet Bubnov says, p. cxvi, “Catalogues
of Additional MSS (omnia volumina inspexi, quae ante a. 1895 edita
sunt).” BM Egerton 823, 12th century, fol. 4r. BN 7412, 12th and
13th centuries, fols. 1-9, “Waztalkora sive tract. de utilitatibus
astrolabii.” Professor D. B. Macdonald suggests that _Waztalkora_ is
for _rasmu-l-kura_, “the describing of the sphere in lines.”
[2793] (1899), p. 370.
[2794] (1899), p. 374.
[2795] Ep. 24.
[2796] (1899), p. 370.
[2797] P. 109.
[2798] Bubnov (1899), 370.... “Hoc opusculum ex Arabico versum ad manum
habuit, retractavit dicendique genere expolivit.”
[2799] Printed by Pez. _Thesaur. Anecdot. Noviss._ III, ii, 95-106.
“Herimannus Christi pauperum peripsima et philosophiae tyronum asello
imo limace tardior assecla.” The MSS are numerous.
[2800] Digby 174, fol. 210v; also noted by Bubnov (1899), p. 113.
Hermann’s dedicatory prologue, however, does not give his friend’s name
in full, but reads in this MS, “B. amico suo.”
[2801] See Clerval, _Hermann le Dalmate_, Paris, 1891, in _Compte
rendu du Congrès scientifique international des catholiques, Sciences
Historiques_, 163-9. Also, I believe, published separately as _Hermann
le Dalmate et les premières traductions latines des traités arabes
d’astronomie au moyen âge_, Paris, Picard, 1891, 11 pp. Clerval adduced
only one MS in support of his contention and took up the untenable
position that Arabic astronomy was unknown in Latin until the twelfth
century. He also did not distinguish between the different works on the
astrolabe.
[2802] Munich CLM 14836, fols. 16v-24r. BM Royal 15-B-IX, fol. 51r-: in
both cases followed by the treatise of twenty-one chapters.
[2803] Professor Haskins has announced as in preparation an article on
Hermann the translator which will perhaps solve the difficulties.
[2804] In a Berlin manuscript of the twelfth century (Berlin 956, fol.
11) there is added a note in a thirteenth century hand recounting the
legend that this Hermann was the son of a king and queen and that, his
mother having been asked before his birth whether she would prefer
a handsome and foolish son or a learned and shamefully ugly one and
she having chosen the latter alternative, he was born hunchbacked and
lame. It was from this MS of the treatise on the astrolabe that Pertz
edited the legend in the _Monumenta Germaniae_ (_Scriptores_, V, 267).
Rose (1905), p. 1179, calls the writer of this note Berengar, too,
asking anent the opening words of the note, “De isto hermanno legitur
in historia,” “Aus welcher _historia_ hat der Schreiber (Berengarius)
seine Fabeln?” The note at the close of the treatise in Digby 174, fol.
210v, gives a different version of the legend, stating that Hermann
was a good man and dear to God and that one day an angel offered
him his choice between bodily health without great wisdom and the
greatest science with corporal infirmity. Hermann chose the latter and
afterwards became a paralytic and gouty.
[2805] This treatise, in which Hermann expresses amazement that Bede
has so underestimated the duration of the moon, immediately precedes
the one on the astrolabe in BN nouv. acq. 229, a German MS of the
twelfth century, fols. 17r-19r (formerly pp. 265-269). After the
treatise on the astrolabe follows a third work by Hermann, “de quodam
horologio,” fols. 25v-28r. Then follows the treatise in twenty-one
chapters on the astrolabe.
These citations alone are sufficient to demonstrate the error of
Clerval’s assertion: (1891), 165. “On ne peut invoquer aucune preuve
sérieuse en faveur d’Hermann Contract. Jacques de Bergame et Trithème
... sont les premiers qui aient attribué au moine de Constance les
traités en question.”
[2806] Bubnov (1899) 372. “Habet etiam ex divinitatis archana
institutione et physica lata ratione cum omnibus mundanis creaturis
concordiam in rebus omnibus, secundum phisiologos non parvam
congruentiam....” Bubnov unfortunately used only one of his four MSS in
printing this text, and there often seems to be something wrong with it
or with his punctuation. This criticism applies more especially to the
passage quoted in the following footnote.
[2807] _Ibid._, “Et ut Chaldaicas reticeam gentilogias (_sic_) qui
omnem humanam vitam astrologicis attribuunt rationationibus et quosdam
constellationum effectus per xii signa disponunt, quique etiam
conceptiones et nativitates, hominumque mores, prospera seu adversa
ex cursu siderum explicare conantur. Quod illorum tamen frivolae
superstitiositati concedendum est, dum omnia divinae dispositioni
commendanda sint. Illud est ovum a nullo forbillandum (Bubnov suggests
the reading _furcillandum_ in parentheses, but _sorbillandum_ seems
to me the obvious reading), nisi prius foetidos inscitiae exhalaverit
ructus et feces mundialium evomerit studiorum.” The passage is rather
incoherent as it stands, but I hope that I have correctly interpreted
its meaning.
[2808] III, 43-45.
[2809] Ademarus Cabannensis, who died about 1035 (Bubnov, 1899, 382-3).
For Gerbert’s sources in Barcelona see J. M. Burnam, “A Group of
Spanish Manuscripts,” in _Bulletin Hispanique, Annales de la Faculté
des Lettres de Bordeaux_, XXII, 4, p. 329.
[2810] III, 48-53.
[2811] “Plurima me docuit Neptanebus ille magister” (Bubnov, 381).
[2812] _De rebus gestis regum Anglorum_, II, 167-8.
[2813] Bodleian 266, fol. 25r.
[2814] Bubnov (1899), 391. On Gerbert as a magician see further J. J.
I. Döllinger, _Die Papst-Fabeln des Mittelalters_, Munich, 1863, pp.
155-59.
[2815] Digby 83, quarto in skin, well written in large letters with
few abbreviations and illustrated with many figures in red, 76 leaves.
For the _Incipits_ of the four books and their prologues see Macray’s
Catalogue of the Digby MSS.
[2816] Another indication of mathematical activity in tenth century
England is provided by some old verses in English in Royal 17-A-I,
fols. 2v-3, which state that Euclid’s geometry was introduced into
England “Yn tyme of good kyng Adelstones day.” Usually the first Latin
translation of Euclid is supposed to have been that by Adelard of Bath
in the early twelfth century. Halliwell (1839), 56.
[2817] Digby 83, fol. 24, “Epistola Ethelwodi ad Girbertum papam.
Domino summo pontifici et philosopho Girberto pape athelwoldus vite
felicitatem....” Gerbert of course did not become pope until long
after Ethelwold’s death, but this Titulus and Incipit are open to
suspicion anyway, since if Gerbert had become pope he should have been
addressed as Pope Silvester. The article on Ethelwold (DNB) states
that “a treatise on the circle, said to have been written by him and
addressed to Gerbert, afterwards Pope Silvester II, is in the Bodleian
Library (1684, Bodl. MS. Digby 83, f. 24).” William of Malmesbury
mentioned “Adelboldum episcopum, ut dicunt, Winterbrugensem” as the
author of the letter to Gerbert, quoted by Bubnov (1899), 388.
[2818] It has always been so printed: by Pez, Olleris, Curtze, and
Bubnov, and seems to be ascribed to him in most MSS, for which and
other evidence pointing to the bishop of Utrecht as author see Bubnov
(1899), 300-309, 41-45, 384, etc. Bubnov, however, failed to note Digby
83 either in connection with this letter or at all in his long list of
mathematical MSS (XVII-CXIX). It may therefore be well to note that
the letter as given in Digby 83 differs considerably from the version
printed by Bubnov. It in general omits epistolary amenities which do
not bear directly on the mathematical question in hand, notably the
entire first paragraph of Bubnov’s text and the close of the second and
third paragraphs. It also abbreviates portions of the fifth paragraph
and the last sentence of the eighth and last paragraph. On the other
hand after the first sentence of the fifth paragraph of Bubnov’s text
it inserts the following passage which seems to be missing in Bubnov’s
text of the letter: “Si quis ergo vult invenire quadraturam circuli
dividat lineam in VII partes spatiumque unius septime partis semotim
ponat. Deinde lineam in VII divisam in duo distribuat et spatium
alterius duorum separatim ponat. Post hoc lineam in VII partitam
triplicet cui triplicate spatium unius septime quod semoverat adiciat.
Ipsa denique totam in IIII partiatur quarum quarta angulis directis per
lineam quadrangulam metiatur. Ad ultimum sumpto spatio alterius duorum
quod prius reposuerat deposito puncto in medio quadranguli eodem spatio
circumducat circinum (circulum) et sic inveniet circuli quadraturam.”
[2819] Bubnov (1899), 41-42, “quod tantum virum quasi conscolasticum
iuvenis convenio.”
[2820] Bubnov does not include it in his edition of the mathematical
works of Gerbert, but as we have seen he was unaware of the existence
of this MS, i.e., Digby 83.
[2821] And also to the _Incipit_ of a treatise in a tenth century
MS at Paris, BN 17,868, fol. 14r, “Quicumque nosse desiderat legem
astrorum....” The treatise or fragment in this Paris MS seems to end
at fol. 17r, or at least at fol. 17v, after which most of the few
remaining leaves of the MS, which has only 21 leaves in all, are
blank. There is some similarity of contents, but the Paris MS is more
astrological. Possibly, however, it is a different part of, or rather
extracts from the same work, since we shall see reasons for thinking
that the text in Digby 83 is incomplete.
[2822] At least such seems to me to be the meaning of the passage,
fol. 21r, “Quippe cum aliquando per situm gentium ipsarum positionem
stellarum demonstrati simus precognita populorum habitatione rei
effectus ad faciliorem curret eventus.”
[2823] Fol. 22r.
[2824] Fol. 76r, the closing words are, “Quod autem de elementis
diximus idem de temporibus deque humoribus intellige sicut hec figura
evidentissime designat.” But the figure is not given.
[2825] Fol. 27v.
[2826] Fol. 31v, “per que predicti planete revoluti diversa in diversis
possunt et etiam secundum genethliacos bonum quidam in quibusdam malum
vero in quibusdam quidam nativitatibus hominem astruunt.”
[2827] Fol. 32r.
[2828] Fol. 36r.
[2829] Fol. 59r, “Herastotenes.”
[2830] Fol. 21r-v.
[2831] Fol. 32r.
[2832] _De rebus gestis regum Anglorum_, II, 167.
[2833] Addit. 17808, fols. 85v-99v, “Mathematica Alhandrei summi
astrologi. Luna est frigide nature et argentei coloris / oculis
descriptio talis subiciatur”: and CLM 560, fols. 61-87, which I have
not seen but which from the description in the catalogue is evidently
the same treatise and has the same _Incipit_, although no author or
title seems to be given.
[2834] Bodleian 266, fol. 179v, “libellum fortune faciens mentionem de
tribus faciebus signorum et planetis regnantibus in eisdem ... mulieres
docte.”
[2835] BN 2598, 15th century, fol. 108r.
[2836] BN 17868, fols. 2r-12v. “Incipit liber Alchandrei”
(Wickersheimer) or Alchandri (Bubnov) “philosophi. Luna est frigide
nature et argentei coloris.” In a passage of Addit. 17808, fol. 86v,
where the years from the beginning of the world are being reckoned, the
year of writing is apparently given as 1040 A. D., but the existence of
the treatise in BN 17868 shows that it was written before 1000. Also
there is something wrong with the passage mentioned in Addit. 17808—as
is very apt to be the case with such figures in medieval MSS—for the
number of years from the beginning of the world to the birth of Christ
is given as 4970 and then the sum of the two as 6018 instead of 6010
years, while at fol. 85v other estimates are given of the number of
years between the Creation and the Incarnation.
[2837] The spellings of such proper names vary in the different MSS or
even in the same one.
[2838] Steinschneider (1905) 30, briefly notes “Alcandrinus,” however.
See below, p. 715 of the present chapter.
[2839] Addit. 17808, fol. 85v; BN 17868, fol. 2r.
[2840] Addit. 17808, fols. 86r-87r; BN 17868, fol. 3v.
[2841] Addit. 17808, fols. 87v-88r.
[2842] BN 17868, fol. 2r; Addit. 17808, fol. 85v; “Iuxta que quia omnia
humana secundum nutum dei disponuntur per septem planetas que subter
(subtus) feruntur eorum nobis potestas innuitur”: BN 17868, fol. 3r;
Addit. 17808, fol. 86v, “Per has autem vii planetas quia ut diximus
et adhuc probabimus humana fata disponuntur regulam certam demus qua
in quo signo queque sit pronoscatur.” Only in a third passage does he
attribute such views to the mathematici; Addit. 17808, fol. 88v, “Cum
sint signa xii in zodiaco cumque iuxta mathematicos et secundum horum
diversissimos potestates fata omnium ita volente sapientissimo domino
disponantur....”
[2843] Addit. 17808, fol. 89r, “Que quum ita discernuntur non falsa
opinio persuasit istis humana principaliter gubernante domino moderari
cum itaque ut mundus homo unusquisque ex his iiii compaginetur
elementis.”
[2844] Addit. 17808, fol. 89v. But the lists are left incomplete and a
blank leaf, which is also left unnumbered, follows in the MS.
[2845] BN 17868, fol. 5r: Addit. 17808, fol. 90r, “Hec sunt xxviii
principales partes vel astra per que omnium fata disponuntur et
indubitanter tam futura quam presentia prenuntiantur a quocumque
itus reditus ortus occasus horum horoscoporum iocundissimo auxilio
diligenter providentur.”
[2846] BN 17868, fol. 5v.
[2847] BN 17868, fol. 6r.
[2848] BN 17868, fol. 9r-; Addit. 17808, fols. 94v-95v.
[2849] BN 17868, fol. 10r; Addit. 17808, fol. 96r.
[2850] Addit. 17808, fol. 97r.
[2851] Addit. 17808, fol. 97v. In BN 17868, fol. 11r, we read,
“Explicit liber primus. Incipit liber secundus.” And then begins
the letter of Argafalaus with the words, “Regi macedonum Alexandro
astrologo et universa philosophia perfectissimo Argafalaus servuus suus
condicione et nacione ingenuus caldeus, professione vero secundus ab
illo astrologus.”
[2852] Addit. 17808, fol. 99r-v. This does not appear in BN 17868 which
goes on to discuss various astrological influences of the 12 hours of
the day and of the night. After this there is a space left blank in the
middle of fol. 12v: then more is said concerning hours of the planets
and interrogations until at the bottom of fol. 13r comes the letter of
Phethosiris to Nechepso. But no definite ending is indicated either of
the letter of Argafalaus or the Liber Secundus of Alchandrus.
In a MS now missing but listed in the late 15th century catalogue of
the MSS in the library of St. Augustine’s Abbey, Canterbury (No. 1172,
James 332) was a “Breviarium alhandredi su’m astrologi et peritissimi
de soia (scienda?) qualibet ignota nullo decrete.” This was one of the
MSS donated to the monastery by John of London.
BN 4161, 16th century, #5, Breviarium Alhandriae, summi Astrologi de
scientia qualiter ignota nullo indicante investigari possit.
[2853] Addit. 17808, fol. 89r, “figuram quam super hac re Alexander
Macedo composuit diligentissime posterius describemus”; fol. 95r,
“Hinc Alexander macedo dicit eclipsin solis et lune certissima ratione
colligi”; fol. 96r. “Aut iuxta alexandrum macedonem draco quasi octava
planeta.”
[2854] Ashmole 369, late 13th century, fols. 77-84v. “Mathematica
Alexandri summi astrologi. In exordio omnis creature herus huranicus
inter cuncta sidera XII maluit signa fore .../ ... nam quod lineam
designat eandem stellam occupat. Explicit.” A further discussion of the
contents of this work will be found below in Chapter 48, vol. II, p.
259.
[2855] BN 17868, fol. 17r. The Incipit is the same as in Ashmole 369.
The work here seems to be incomplete, since after fol. 17v most of the
remaining leaves of the MS (which has 21 fols. in all) are blank.
[2856] The vowels being represented by the consonants following, a
common medieval cipher.
[2857] All Souls 81, 15th century, fols. 145v-164r. “Cum sint 28
mansiones lune....” Coxe was mistaken in thinking that the work
of Alkandrinus continued to fol. 188 and was in two parts, for at
fol. 163r we read, “Expliciunt iudicia libri Alkandrini que sunt in
divisione triplici 12 signorum que sunt apparencie per certa tempora
super terram.” Moreover, the seven chapters on the planets which follow
end at fol. 183v “... finem fecimus. Completa fuit hec compilatio in
conversione sancti pauli apostoli anno domini 1350 (1305?) vacante sede
per mortem Benedicti undecimi cuius anima requiescat in pace. Amen.”
It would therefore seem that some compiler has made an extract from
Alchandrus on the twenty-eight mansions.
[2858] BN 10271, fols. 9r-52v, “Incipit liber alchandrini philosophi
de nativitatibus hominum secundum compositionem duodecim signorum
celi, quem reformavit quidem philosophus cristianus prout patet,
quia in quibusdam differt iste liber ab antiquo primordiali. Primo
facies arietis in homine sive in masculo. Alnaliet est prima facies
arietis....”
[2859] Steinschneider (1905), 30.
[2860] The _editio princeps_ seems to be “Arcandam doctor peritissimus
ac non vulgaris astrologus, de veritatibus et praedictionibus
astrologiae et praecipue nativitatum seu fatalis dispositionis
vel diei cuiuscunque nati, nuper per Magistrum Richardum Roussat,
canonicum Lingoniensem, artium et medicinae professorem, de confuso
ac indistincto stilo non minus quam e tenebris in lucem aeditus, re
cognitus, ac innumeris (ut pote passim) erratis expurgatus, ita ut per
multa maxime necessaria et utilissima adiecerit atque adnotaverit modo
eiusdem dexteritate praelo primo donatus.” Paris, 1542.
The British Museum also contains another Latin edition of Paris, 1553;
French editions of Rouen, 1584 and 1587, Lyons 1625; and English
versions printed at London, 1626 (translated from the French), 1630,
1637, and 1670.
[2861] BN 7349, 15th century, fol. 56r, seems only a fragment of the
work; BN 7351, 14th century, takes up the various signs.
[2862] CLM 527, 13-14th century, fols. 36-42, de physica signorum et
supernascentium et aegrotantium.
[2863] Addit. 15236, English hand of 13-14th century, fols. 130-52r
“libellus Alchandiandi.” BN 7486, 14th century, “Incipit liber
alkardiani phylosophi. Cum omne quod experitur sit experiendum propter
se vel propter aliud....”
[2864] The set in which the first line reads, “Tuum indumentum durabit
tempore longo.”
[2865] Very probably this title was derived from the _Incipit_ just
given in note 4, p. 716.
[2866] See Sloane 2472, 3554, 3857.
[2867] BN 17868, fol. 14r-16v. The letter of Petosiris on the sphere of
life and death at fol. 13r-v “Incipit epistola Phetosiri de sphaera”
separates this treatise or fragment from the preceding _liber Alchandri
philosophi_. Also this treatise is in a different and slightly older
hand than fols. 2-13 are, or at least such was Bubnov’s opinion (1899),
125, note.
[2868] BN 17686, fol. 14v, “que sarraceni nuncupant ita.”
[2869] Berlin 165 (Phillips 1790), 9-10th century. I have not seen the
MS, but follow Rose’s full description of it in his _Verzeichnis der
lateinischen Handschriften_, I, 362-9.
[2870] Cod. Casin. 97 Gal. I, 24-51.
[2871] Berlin 165, fol. 88.
[2872] _Ibid._, fols. 40-2.
[2873] _Ibid._, fol. 39v.
[2874] Edited with an English translation, which I employ in my
quotations, by Rev. Oswald Cockayne in vol. II of his _Leechdoms,
Wortcunning, and Starcraft of Early England_, in RS vol. 35, in 3
vols., London, 1864-1866. The relation of Bald and Cild to the work is
indicated by the colophon at the close of the second book: “Bald habet
hunc librum, Cild quem conscribere iussit,”—“Bald owns this book; Cild
is the one he told to write (or copy?) it.” The following third book is
therefore presumably of other authorship.
[2875] J. F. Payne, _English Medicine in Anglo-Saxon Times_, 1904, p.
155.
[2876] Book I, cap. 87.
[2877] I, 45.
[2878] I, 85.
[2879] III, 47.
[2880] I, 86.
[2881] I, 68.
[2882] II, 66.
[2883] I, 45.
[2884] I, 63.
[2885] II, 65.
[2886] III, 61.
[2887] Sloane 475 (olim Fr. Bernard 116), 231 leaves, including two
codices, one of the 12th century, which is also medical but with
which we shall not deal at present, and the other of the 10th or 11th
century and written in different hands. The MS is mutilated both at the
beginning and the close.
Sloane 2839, 11th century, 112 leaves.
[2888] Sloane 2839, fols, iv-3, “Liber Cirrurgium Cauterium Apollonii
et Galieni.” James, _Western MSS in Trinity College_, Cambridge, III,
26-8, describes fifty drawings, chiefly of surgical operations, in MS
1044, early 13th century. By that date cauterization seems to have
become less common.
[2889] Professor T. W. Todd thinks that I am too severe upon the
practice of cauterization, and that it may sometimes have served as a
counter-irritant like mustard plasters and the blister.
[2890] Sloane, 2839, fols. 79v-80v.
[2891] “Ad stomachum ubi ferro operare non oportes sansugias apponas.”
[2892] _Imbrocare._ I have not discovered exactly what it means.
[2893] Sloane 475, fol. 224r; Sloane 2839, fol. 97r.
[2894] Sloane 475, fol. 133, _et seq._
[2895] Sloane 475, fol. 224v.
[2896] Sloane 475, fols. 1-124. At fol. 36r occurs the familiar
pseudo-letter of Hippocrates to Antigonus; at fols. 8v-10r is a passage
almost identical with that at the close of the _De medicamentis_ of
Marcellus, 1889, p. 382; an incantation from Marcellus is repeated
at fol. 117v. At fol. 37r we read “Explicit Liber II. Incipit Liber
Tertius ad ventris rigiditatem”; at fol. 60r, “Explicit liber tertius.
Incipit Liber IIII”; at fol. 85r, “Incipit Liber V.”
[2897] See fol. 110r, “Cros, oros, comigeos, delig(c)ros, falicros,
spolicros, splena mihi”; and fol. 114r, “Opas, nolipas, opium,
nolimpium.” Those who delight in ciphers will perhaps detect in the
latter incantation a hidden allusion to opiates.
[2898] Fol. 117v; see Marcellus (1889), p. 123, cap. 12.
[2899] Fol. 111r.
[2900] Fol. 111v.
[2901] BN nouv. acq. 229, fol. 7v (once p. 246), “nomina septem
sanctorum germanorum dormientium que sunt hec, Maximianus, Malchus,
Martinianus, Constantinus, Dionisius, Iohannes, Serapion.”
[2902] Sloane 475, fol. 122v.
[2903] “Ellum super ellam sedebat et virgam viridem in manu tenebat et
dicebat, Virgam viridis reunitere in simul.”
[2904] Sloane 475, fol. 112v. Unintelligible letters follow.
[2905] Egerton 821, 12th century, fols. 52v-60v.
[2906] _Ibid._, fol. 53v, _vultilis_, which I assume should be
_vulturis_ rather than _vituli_, or bull-calf.
[2907] Egerton 821, fol. 57.
[2908] _Ibid._, fol. 58v.
[2909] _Ibid._, fol. 60r.
[2910] BN 7028, 11th century, fols. 136v, 140-3, 154r, and 156r.
[2911] BN nouv. acq. 229, 12th century, fols. 1r-10r (once pp. 233-51),
opening, “Rationem observationis vestre pietati secundum precepta
doctorum medicinalium ut potui....”
[2912] BN nouv. acq. 229, fol. 2r. March is treated first and February
last, while a similar discussion later in the same work (fols. 8r-9r,
Quid unoquoque mense utendum quidve vitandum sit) begins with January.
[2913] BN nouv. acq. 229, fol. 7.
[2914] Fol. 6r.
[2915] Fol. 4v.
[2916] Fols. 4v-5r.
[2917] Fol. 7r.
[2918] Fol. 7r-v.
[2919] Fol. 7v.
[2920] Fol. 9v.
[2921] What is known of the School of Salerno has already been
briefly indicated in English by H. Rashdall, _Universities of Europe
in the Middle Ages_, 1895, I, 75-86, and T. Puschmann, _History of
Medical Education_, English translation, London, 1891, pp. 197-211.
The standard work on the subject is Salvatore De Renzi, _Collectio
Salernitana_, in Italian with Latin texts, published at Naples in five
volumes from 1852 to 1859. It contains a history of the School of
Salerno by Renzi and various texts brought to light and dissertations
discussing them by Renzi, Daremberg, Henschel, and others.
Unfortunately this publication proceeded by the unsystematic piecemeal
and hand-to-mouth method, and new texts and discoveries were brought
to the editor’s attention during the process, so that the history of
the school and the texts in the earlier volumes have to be supplemented
and corrected by the fuller versions and dissertations in the later
volumes. It is too bad that all the materials could not have been
collected and more systematically arranged and collated before
publication. Also some of the texts printed have but the remotest
connection with Salerno, while others have nothing to do with medicine.
To this collection of materials some further additions have been made
by P. Giacosa, _Magistri Salernitani nondum editi_, Turin, 1901.
For further bibliography see in the recent reprint of Harrington’s
English translation, _The School of Salerno_ (1920), pp. 50-52.
[2922] Notably Daremberg.
[2923] II, 59 (MG. SS. III, 600).
[2924] S. de Renzi, _Collectio Salernitana_, IV, 185, _Practica
Petroncelli_, perhaps from an imperfect copy; IV, 315, Sulle opere che
vanno sotto il nome di Petroncello. Heeg, _Pseudodemocrit. Studien_, in
_Abhandl. d. Berl. Akad._ (1913), p. 42, shows that what Renzi printed
tentatively as the table of contents and an extract from the third book
of the _Practica_, is not by Petrocellus but by the Pseudo-Democritus,
and that one MS of it dates from the ninth or tenth century.
[2925] Petrocellus, Περὶ διδάξεων, Eine Sammlung von Rezepten in
englischer Sprache aus dem 11-12 Jahrhundert. Nach einer Handschrift
des Britischen Museums herausg. v. M. Löweneck (in Anglo-Saxon and
Latin), 1896, pp. viii, 57, Heft 12 in _Erlanger Beiträge z. englischen
Philologie_. The treatise perhaps also contains selections from
the _Passionarius_ of Gariopontus. It had been published before in
Cockayne, _Anglo-Saxon Leechdoms_, 1864-1866, III, 82-143.
[2926] Payne (1904), pp. 155-6.
[2927] _Ibid._, p. 148.
[2928] The Latin text reads, “liver of a hedgehog,” and doubtless
either would be equally efficacious.
[2929] Quoted by Payne (1904), p. 152, from Cockayne’s translation.
[2930] Renzi (1852-9), IV, 185.
[2931] Renzi, IV, 190, “Propterea fili karissime cum diuturno tempore
de medicina tractassemus omnipotentis Dei nutu admonitus placuit ut ex
grecis locis sectantes auctores omnium causarum dogmata in breviloquium
latino sermone conscriberemus.”
[2932] For the two passages on epilepsy see Renzi, IV, pp. 235 and 293.
[2933] Renzi, I, 417-516, _Flos medicinae_, a text of 2130 lines; V,
1-104, the fuller text of 3526 lines; 113-72, Notice bibliographique;
385-406, Notes choisies de M. Baudry de Balzac au _Flos Sanitatis_.
[2934] “Anglorum Regi scribit Schola tota Salerni.” Some MSS have
Francorum or Roberto instead of Anglorum.
[2935] Lines 2692-3.
[2936] K. Sudhoff, _Zum Regimen Sanitatis Salernitanum_, in _Archiv f.
Gesch. d. Medizin_, VII (1914), 360, and IX (1915-1916), 1-9.
[2937] Arnald de Villanova, _Opera_, Lyons, 1532, fol. 147v.
[2938] Lines 1918-9, 1932-3, 1973-4, 1985, in Renzi’s first text
of 2130 lines; in the fuller version they are somewhat more widely
separated: lines 3053, 3130, 3227, 3267.
[2939] Lines 1845-55 or 2873-83.
[2940] Renzi, V, 377-8.
[2941] _Ibid._, 372-3.
[2942] _Ibid._, 379-81.
[2943] _Ibid._, 350.
[2944] Professor T. Wingate Todd comments upon this passage: “Of course
this is _post hoc propter hoc_, but it is the typical history of a case
of Bell’s palsy occurring after a ‘chill.’”
[2945] Renzi, V, 371, “Involuntariam urine emissionem quidam
patiebantur et adhuc multi patiuntur et maxime servi et ancille qui
male induti et discalciati incedunt, unde frigiditate incensa vesica
fit quasi paralitica cum urinam nequeat continere.”
[2946] Giacosa (1901), pp. 71-166.
[2947] Giacosa (1901), p. 146.
[2948] _Ibid._, p. 145.
[2949] Renzi, V, 331-2.
[2950] Many of the works listed by Peter the Deacon and some others
which he does not name have been printed under Constantinus’ name,
either in the edition of the works of Isaac issued at Lyons in 1515, or
in the partial edition of the works of Constantinus printed at Basel in
1536 and 1539, or in an edition of Albucasis published at Basel in 1541.
An early MS containing several of Constantinus’ works is Gonville and
Caius 411, 12-13th century, fol. 1-, Viaticum, 69- de melancholia,
77v- de stomacho, 98v- de oblivione, 100r- de coitu, (no author is named
for 109v- liber elefantie, 113- de modo medendi), 121- liber febrium,
(169- de inamidarium Galieni).
The chief secondary investigations concerning Constantinus Africanus
are:
Daremberg, _Notices et Extraits des Manuscrits Médicaux_, 1853, pp.
63-100, “Recherches sur un ouvrage qui a pour titre Zad el-Monçafir en
arabe, Ephrodes en grec, Viatique en latin, et qui est attribué dans
les textes arabes et grecs à Abou Djafar, et dans le texte latin à
Constantin.”
Puccinotti, _Storia della Medicina_, II, i, pp. 292-350, 1855, devoted
several chapters to Constantinus and tried to defend him from the
charge of plagiarism and to maintain that the _Viaticum_ and some other
works were original.
Steinschneider, _Constantinus Africanus und seine arabischen Quellen_,
in Virchow’s _Archiv für Pathologische Anatomie_, etc., Berlin, 1866,
vol. 37, pp. 351-410. This should be supplemented by pp. 9-12 of his
_Die europäischen Übersetzungen aus dem Arabischen_ (1905).
[2951] _Notices et Extraits des Manuscrits Médicaux_ (1853), p. 86.
[2952] _Histoire des Sciences Médicales_ (1870), I, 261.
[2953] Indeed Daremberg said in 1853 (p. 85, note) “dans le moyen âge
beaucoup d’auteurs citent volontiers Constantine comme une autorité.”
[2954] Perhaps through the fault of the printer the list of the
writings of Constantinus given by Peter the Deacon is defective as
reproduced in tabular form by Steinschneider (1866), pp. 353-4.
Steinschneider also incorrectly speaks of Leo of Ostia as well as
Peter the Deacon as a source for Constantinus (p. 352, “Die Schriften
Constantins sind bekanntlich von seinen alten Biographen, Petrus
Diaconus und Leo Ostiensis verzeichnet worden”), since Leo’s portion of
the _Chronicle_ ends before Constantinus is mentioned.
[2955] Peter was born about 1107 and was placed in the monastery of
Monte Cassino by his parents in 1115. He became librarian. _Monumenta
Germaniae, Scriptores_, VII, 562 and 565.
[2956] _Chronica Mon. Casinensis_, Lib. III, auctore Petro, MG. SS.
VII, 728-9; Muratori, _Scriptores_, IV, 455-6 (lib. III, cap. 35).
[2957] _Petri Diaconi De viribus illustribus Casinensibus_, cap. 23, in
Fabricius, _Bibl. Graec._, XIII, 123.
[2958] Yet modern compilers and writers of encyclopedia articles
invariably repeat “Carthage” and “Babylon.”
[2959] BN 14700, fol. 171v, cited by Baur (1903), who also notes
parallel passages in Al-Gazel, _Phil. tr._ I, 1; and Avicenna, _De
divis. philos._, fol. 141.
[2960] Gundissalinus and Daniel Morley. Al-Farabi’s list of eight
mathematical sciences, including “the science of spirits,” was also
reproduced by Vincent of Beauvais in the thirteenth century, _Speculum
doctrinale_, XVI.
[2961] Possibly there is some confusion with Galen’s similar experience
with the physicians of Rome, which Constantinus may have reproduced
in some one of his translations of Galen in such a way as to lead the
reader to consider it his own experience.
[2962] The words are the same both in the _Chronicle_ and _Illustrious
Men_: “quem cum vidissent Afri ita ad plenum omnibus (omnium?) gentium
eruditum, cogitaverunt occidere eum.”
[2963] Pagel (1902), p. 644, “Vorher soll er kurze Zeit noch in Reggio,
einer kleinen Stadt in der Nähe von Byzanz, als Protosekretär des
Kaisers Constantinos Monomachos sich aufgehalten und das Reisehandbuch
des Abu Dschafer übersetzt haben.” But Pagel gives no source for this
statement.
Apparently the notion is due to the fact that a Greek treatise entitled
_Ephodia_, of which there are numerous MSS and which seems to be a
translation of the same Arabic work as that upon which Constantinus
based his _Viaticum_, speaks of a Constantine as its author who was
proto-secretary and lived at Reggio or Rhegium.
Daremberg (1853), p. 77, held that a Vatican MS of the _Ephodia_ was of
the tenth century and therefore this Greek translation could not be the
work of Constantinus Africanus in the next century, but Steinschneider
(1866), p. 392, only says, “Die griechische Uebersetzung des Viaticum
soll bis in die Zeit Constantins hinaufreichen.”
Another MS, Escorial &-II-9, 16th century, fol. 1-, contains a
“Commeatus Peregrinantium” whose author is called “Ebrubat Zafar filio
Elbazar,” which perhaps designates Abu Jafar Ahmed Ibn-al-Jezzar, whom
Daremberg and Steinschneider call the author of the Arabic original of
the _Viaticum_. The work is said to have been translated into Greek “a
Constantino Primo a secretis Regis,” which suggests that Constantinus
was perhaps first of the royal secretaries rather than of Reggio either
in Norman Italy or near Byzantium. The translation from Greek into
Latin is ascribed to Antonius Eparchus. The opening sentences of each
book of this Latin version from the Greek by Eparchus differ in wording
but agree in substance with those of the _Viaticum_ of Constantinus
Africanus, if we omit some transitional sentences in the latter.
[2964] _Opera_ (1536), p. 215.
[2965] _De animalibus_, XXII, i, 1.
[2966] Rawlinson C, 328, fol. 3. It is accompanied by the legend, “This
is Constantinus, monk of Monte Cassino, who is as it were the fount
of that science of long standing from the judgment of urines, and it
has exhibited a true cure in all the diseases in this book and in many
other books. To whom come women with urine that he may tell them what
is the cause of the disease.” The illumination shows Constantinus
seated, holding a book on his knees with his left hand, while he raises
his right hand and forefinger in didactic style. He wears the tonsure,
has a beard but no mustache, and seems to be approached by one woman
and two men carrying two jars of urine.
[2967] See Margoliouth, _Avicenna_, 1913, p. 49.
[2968] Only the ten books of theory are printed in the 1539 edition of
Constantinus.
[2969] _Chirurgia_, at pp. 324-41.
[2970] _Opera omnia ysaac_ (1515), fol. 126v, “Liber decimus practice
qui antidotarium dicitur in duas divisus partes.”
Isaac Israeli is the subject of the first chapter in Husik (1916), who
calls him (p. 2) “the first Jew, so far as we know, to devote himself
to philosophical and scientific discussions.”
[2971] Daremberg (1853), pp. 82-5, gives the prefaces of Ali and
Constantinus in parallel columns.
[2972] Printed in 1492 with the works of Ali ben Abbas; Stephen’s
translation was made at Antioch in Syria.
[2973] Steinschneider (1866), p. 359.
[2974] “Ultimam et maiorem deesse sensi partem, alteram vero
interpretis callida depravatam fraude.”
[2975] Amplon. Octavo 62.
[2976] In his gloss to the _Viaticum_ of Constantinus.
[2977] _Berlin HSS Verzeichnis_ (1905), pp. 1059-65, to whom I owe the
preceding references to Ferrarius and Giraldus.
[2978] Rose cites Bamberg L-iii-9. The two following MSS are perhaps
also worth noting: The _Pantegni_ as contained in CU Trinity 906, 12th
century, finely written, fols. 1-141v, comprises only ten books. The
first opens, “Cum totius generalitas tres principales partes habeat”;
the tenth ends, “Unde acutum oportet habere sensum ad intelligendum.
Explicit.”
St. John’s 85, close of 13th century, “Constantini africani Pantegnus
in duas partes divisus quarum prima dicitur Theorica continens decem
libros secunda dicitur Practica 33 capita continens,” as a table of
contents written in on the fly-leaf states. The ten books of theory
end at fol. 100r, “Explicit prima pars pantegni scilicet de theorica.
Incipit secunda pars scilicet practica et est primus liber de regimento
sanitatis.” This single book in 33 chapters on the preservation
of health ends at fol. 116v, and at fol. 117r begins the _Liber
divisionum_ of Rasis.
[2979] In Berlin 898, a 12th century MS of Stephen’s translation of
Ali’s _Practica_, this ninth section by Constantinus and John is for
some reason substituted for the corresponding book of Stephen.
[2980] He calls himself, “iohannes quidam agarenus (Saracenus?)
quondam, qui noviter ad fidem christiane religionis venerat cum rustico
pisano belle filius ac professione medicus.”
[2981] The main objection to this theory is that Stephen of Pisa,
translating in 1127, speaks as if the latter portion of Ali’s work
was still untranslated. Rose therefore holds that John had not yet
published his translation, although we have seen that he completed the
surgical section by 1115.
[2982] In _Opera omnia ysaac_, Lyons, 1515, II, fols. 144-72, “Viaticum
ysaac quod constantinus sibi attribuit”; in the Basel, 1536, edition
of the works of Constantinus, pp. 1-167, under the title, “De morborum
cognitione et curatione lib. vii”; in the Venice, 1505, edition of
Gerardus de Solo (Bituricensis), “Commentum eiusdem super viatico
cum textu”; and in the Lyons, 1511, edition of Rhazes, _Opera parva
Albubetri_.
A fairly early but imperfect MS is CU Trinity 1064, 12-13th century.
Laud. Misc. 567, late 12th century, fol. 2, recognizes in its Titulus
that the _Viaticum_ is a translation, “Incipit Viaticum a Constantino
in Latinam linguam translatam.”
[2983] Steinschneider (1866), 368-9.
[2984] See above, page 745, note 2.
[2985] In the 1515 edition of Isaac’s works, I, 11-, 156-, and 203-.
Peter the Deacon presumably refers to these three works in speaking
of “Dietam ciborum. Librum febrium quem de Arabica lingua transtulit.
Librum de urinis.” Whether the two initial treatises in the 1515
edition of Isaac, dealing with definitions and the elements, were
translated by Constantinus or by Gerard of Cremona is doubtful.
[2986] See CLM 187, fol. 8; 168, fol. 23; 161, fol. 41; 270, fol. 10;
13034, fol. 49, for 13-14th century copies of Galen’s commentary upon
the _Aphorisms_ of Hippocrates with a preface by Constantinus.
University College Oxford 89, early 14th century, fol. 90, Incipiunt
amphorismi Ypocratis cum commento domini Constantini Affricani montis
Cassienensis monachi; fol. 155, Eiusdem Prognostica cum Galeni
commento, eodem interprete; fols. 203-61, Eiusdem liber de regimine
acutorum cum eiusdem commento eodem interprete.
[2987] _De viris illustribus_, cap. 23, “... transtulit de diversis
gentium linguis libros quamplurimos in quibus praecipue ...”:
_Chronica_, Lib. III, “... transtulit de diversorum gentium linguis
libros quamplurimos in quibus sunt hi praecipue....”
[2988] “Librum duodecim graduum” in _De viris illus._: in the
_Chronicle_, “Liber graduum.”
[2989] Edition of Basel, 1536, at pp. 280-98 and 215-74 respectively.
[2990] It is found in Laud. Misc. 567, late 12th century, fol. 51v.
[2991] Edition of 1536, pp. 283-4.
[2992] See below, Chapter 64.
[2993] _Zeitsch. f. klass. Philol._ (1896), pp. 1098ff.
[2994] J. A. Endres, _Petrus Damiani und die weltliche Wissenschaft_,
1910, p. 35, in _Beiträge_, VIII, 3.
[2995] James (1903), p. 59, “Tractatus Alfani Salernitanus de quibusdam
questionibus medicinalibus.”
[2996] CU Trinity 1365, early 12th century, fols. 155-162v,
_Experimenta archiep. Salernitani_.
[2997] Judging from its opening and closing words as given by James.
[2998] _De coitu_, edition of 1536, p. 306.
[2999] _Viaticum_, VI, 19.
[3000] _Practica_, X, 1; in Isaac, _Opera_, 1515, II, fol. 126.
[3001] _Ibid._, VII, 31; fol. 111r.
[3002] _Ibid._, IV, 37; fol. 96r.
[3003] _Ibid._, V, 17; fol. 99r.
[3004] _De melancholia_ (1536), p. 290.
[3005] _Practica_, VIII, 40; ed. of 1515, fol. 118v.
[3006] _Practica_, IV, 39, and V, 7; ed. of 1515, fols. 96r and 98r.
[3007] Ed. of 1536, p. 358; also in the _Viaticum_, I, 22; p. 20.
[3008] _Viaticum_, I, 22; p. 21.
[3009] _Viaticum_, VII, 13: _De gradibus_ (1536), p. 377.
[3010] According to Steinschneider (1866), p. 402, it is only from
the citations of Constantinus that we know of a work by Rufus on
melancholy. See especially _De melancholia_ (1536), p. 285, “Invenimus
Rufum clarissimum medicum de melancholia fecisse librum....”
[3011] _De gradibus_ (1536), p. 378.
[3012] Edition of 1536, pp. 20, 290, 356.
[3013] _Theorica_, X, 9; ed. of 1515, fol. 54.
[3014] _Practica_, VII, 59 (1515), fol. 114v.
[3015] Ed. of 1541, pp. 319-21.
[3016] _Spec. nat._, XVI, 49.
[3017] _De gradibus_ (1536), p. 360, “de quo Arabū (Aristotle?) in
libro de lapidibus intitulato.”
[3018] _Manoscritto Salernitano dilucidato dal Prof. Henschel_, in
Renzi (1853), II, 1-80, especially pp. 16, 41, 59.
[3019] _De aegritudinum curatione tractatus_, Renzi, II, 81-386; _De
febribus tractatus_, II, 737-68.
[3020] The preface to Constantinus’ translation of Isaac on fevers is
addressed to his “dearest son, John”: see Brussels, Library of Dukes
of Burgundy 15489, 14th century, “Quoniam te karissime fili Iohanne”;
Cambrai 914, 13-14th century; Cambrai 907, 14th century, fol. 1,
Prefatio Constantini ad Johannem discipulum.
[3021] However, in an Oxford MS the _Liber aureus_ itself is ascribed
to “John, son of Constantinus”: Bodleian 2060, #1, Joannis filii
Constantini de re medica liber aureus.
[3022] Interest in such works was aroused by the almost simultaneous
publication of R. Hendrie’s English translation of Theophilus,
London, 1847; the publication of the _Mappe clavicula_ in a “Letter
from Sir Thomas Phillipps to Albert Way” in _Archaeologia_, XXXII,
183-244, London, 1847; and the inclusion of Heraclius, _De coloribus
et de artibus Romanorum_, in Mrs. Merrifield’s _Ancient Practice of
Painting_, London, 1849. Hendrie printed the Latin text of Theophilus
with his translation. A. Ilg published a revised Latin text with a
German translation in 1874, with a fuller account of the MSS.
[3023] Merrifield (1849), I, 166-74.
[3024] Berthelot (1893), I, 29. He dated, however, Robert of Chester’s
translation of Morienus thirty-eight years too late in that century,
mistaking the Spanish for the Christian era.
[3025] _Ibid._, p. 18.
[3026] Berthelot (1893), I, 169.
[3027] Merrifield (1849), I, 183. See also pp. 189-91.
[3028] _Ibid._, p. 183, “Nil tibi scribo equidem quod non prius ipse
probassem.”
[3029] _Ibid._, p. 187.
[3030] _Traité des Arts Céramiques_, p. 304, cited by Merrifield, I,
177. This is not, however, to be regarded as the invention of lead
glazing, since, as William Burton writes (“Ceramics” in EB, p. 706),
“lead glazes were extensively used in Egypt and the nearer East in
Ptolemaic times.” He adds, “And it is significant that, though the
Romans made singularly little use of glazes of any kind, the pottery
that succeeded theirs, either in western Europe or in the Byzantine
Empire, was generally covered with glazes rich in lead.”
[3031] For these works see Berthelot (1893), III, or Lippmann (1919),
who follows him. I have not had access to E. Wiedemann, _Zur Chemie
bei den Arabern_, in _Sitzungsberichte der physikalisch-medizinischen
Societät in Erlangen_, XLIII (1911); and his _Die Alchemie bei den
Arabern_, in _Journal für praktische Chemie_, LXXVI (1907), 85-87,
105-23.
[3032] The full title is “Compositiones ad tingenda musiva, pelles et
alia, ad deaurandum ferrum, ad mineralia, ad chrysographiam, ad glutina
quaedam conficienda, aliaque artium documenta.” The MS, Bibliotheca
capituli canonicorum Lucensium, Arm. I, Cod. L, was printed in
Muratori, _Antiquitates Italicae_, II (1739), 364-87. It is described
by Berthelot (1893), I, 7-22, whose comparison of it with previous
treatises I follow.
[3033] Berthelot (1888), I, 12, note.
[3034] Text and some discussion thereof in _Archaeologia_, XXXII
(1847), 183-244. Analyzed by Berthelot (1893), I, 23-65. On the
Schlestadt MS of the 10th century, see Giry in _Bibliothèque de l’École
des Hautes Études_, XXXV (1878), 209-27.
[3035] See recipes 105-93.
[3036] Berthelot (1893), I, 57.
[3037] _Ibid._, 61. Others, however, would trace the discovery of
alcohol back to Hippolytus. See above, p. 468.
[3038] “Accipies ad experimentum donec primitus discas non multum cum
semel facias.”
[3039] “Absconde sanctum et nulli tradendum secretum neque alicui
dederis propheta.”
[3040] Berthelot (1893), I, 303-4.
[3041] Item 265.
[3042] Item 290.
[3043] Item 289.
[3044] _De coloribus et artibus Romanorum_, I, iv. I have somewhat
altered Mrs. Merrifield’s translation (I, 186).
[3045] _Ibid._, I, xi; Mrs. Merrifield (1849), I, 189-91.
[3046] _Ibid._, I, xii:
“Sed vim cristalli cruor antea temperet hirci
Sanguis enim facilem ferro facit his adamantem.”
Mrs. Merrifield (I, 194) has incorrectly rendered this passage, “But
let the blood of a goat first temper it, for this blood makes the iron
so hard that even adamant is soft compared to it.” What Heraclius says
is,
“But first let the blood of a he-goat temper the force of the crystal,
For this blood makes adamant soft to the iron.”
[3047] _Schedula diversarum artium_, III, 98.
[3048] _Ibid._, III, 94.
[3049] _Ibid._, III, 21.
[3050] Berthelot (1893), I, 63. His French translation omits some of
the Latin text as published in _Archaeologia_, cap. 288.
[3051] “Cardan’s concentric circles,” according to Berthelot (1893), I,
64.
[3052] Berthelot (1893), I, 55.
[3053] II, prologus (closing passage). “Huius ergo imitator desiderans
fore, apprehendi atrium agiae Sophiae conspicorque cellulam diversorum
colorum omnimodo varietate refertam et monstrantem singulorum
utilitatem ac naturam. Quo mox inobservato pede ingressus, replevi
armariolum cordis mei sufficienter ex omnibus, quae diligenti
experientia sigillatim perscrutatus, cuncta visu manibusque probata
satis lucide tuo studio commendavi absque invidia. Verum quoniam
huiusmodi picturae usus perspicax non valet esse, quasi curiosus
explorator omnibus modis elaboravi cognoscere, quo artis ingenio et
colorum varietas opus decoraret, et lucem diei solisque radios non
repelleret. Huic exercitio dans operam vitri naturam comprehendo,
eiusque solius usu et varietate id effici posse considero, quod
artificium, sicut visum et auditum didici, studio tuo indagare curavi.”
Ilg’s Latin text (1874).
[3054] III, 47.
[3055] I have followed Ilg’s rather than Hendrie’s text; III, 48.
[3056] Hendrie (1847), pp. 432-3.
[3057] Ernst von Meyer, _History of Chemistry_, 1906.
[3058] Migne, PL 146, 583-4. Some accused the bishop of resort to magic
arts: _Ibid._, 606.
[3059] W. Stubbs, in RS LXIII, p. cix. C. L. Barnes, _Science in Early
England_, in Smithsonian Report for 1895, p. 732. Of the alchemy
ascribed to Dunstan, Elias Ashmole remarked in his _Theatrum Chemicum
Britannicum_, 1652, “He who shall have the happiness to meet with St.
Dunstan’s work _De occulta philosophia_ ... may therein read such
stories as will make him amazed to think what stupendous and immense
things are to be performed by virtue of the Philosopher’s Mercury, of
which a taste only and no more.”
[3060] Berthelot (1893), I, 234.
[3061] Karpinski (1915), pp. 26-30; Haskins, EHR, XXX (1915), 62-5.
[3062] Berlin 956, 12th century, “Hic incipit alchamia. Accipe CCCC
ova gauline que generata sunt et facta in mense martii .../ ... ut
recentiora sint semper et calidiora. Explicit alchamia.” The titles
of the last three chapters are, “de iiii ollis, de cognitione, de
observatione stestarum.” I have not seen the MS but follow Rose’s
description in the Berlin MSS catalogue.
[3063] I have used the edition of Marbod’s poems in Migne, PL vol. 171,
which also contains a life of Marbod. Two secondary accounts of Marbod
are C. Ferry, _De Marbodi Rhedonensis Episcopi vita et carminibus_,
Nemansi, 1877; L. V. E. Ernault, _Marbode, Évêque de Rennes, Sa
vie et ses Œuvres_, in _Bull. et Mém. de la Société Archéologique
du dept. d’Ille-et-Vilaine_, XX, 1-260, Rennes, 1889. See also V.
Rose, _Aristoteles De Lapidibus und Arnoldus Saxo_, in _Zeitsch. f.
deutsches Alterthum_, XVIII (1875), p. 321, _et seq._; L. Pannier,
_Les lapidaires français du moyen âge_, Paris, 1882. C. W. King, _The
Natural History, Ancient and Modern, of Precious Stones and Gems_,
London, 1865.
[3064] CLM 23479, 11th century, fols. 4-10, Carmina de lapidibus eadem
quae Marbodo tribuuntur sed alio ordine. Of CUL 768, 15th century,
fols. 67-80, “Marbodi liber lapidum,” the Catalogue says, “This Latin
poem has been often printed but it does not appear that the editors
have collated this MS. The order of the sections is different from
all those of which Beckmann speaks in his edition (Göttingen, 1799),
answering, however, most nearly to his own.”
[3065] The full name of Tiberius was, of course, Tiberius Claudius Nero
Caesar.
[3066] Library of Dukes of Burgundy 8890, 12th century, Evacis regis.
BN 2621, 12th and 15th centuries, #6, Poemation de gemmis cuius author
dicitur Evax, Rex Arabiae.
Montpellier 277, Liber lapidum preciosorum Evax rex Arabum.
Riccard. 1228, 12th century, fols. 41-54; Incipit prologus Evacis regis
Arabie ad Neronem Tyberium de lapidibus. Incipit lapidarius Evacis
habens nomina gemmarum lx.
BL Hatton 76 contains two letters of Evax, king of the Arabs, to
Tiberius Caesar, on the virtues of stones, according to Cockayne
(1864), I, xc and lxxxiv.
[3067] Printed by J. B. Pitra, III (1855), 324-35.
[3068] BN 7418, 14th century, fol. 116-, (D)amigeronis peritissimi de
lapidibus. Since this is the sole MS known of the prose version (Rose,
1875, p. 326) and is of the 14th century, whereas we have numerous
early MSS of Marbod’s poem, it would seem that this may be derived from
Marbod rather than even from the earlier and fuller work which he is
supposed to have used.
[3069] Namely, Leo, Cancer, Aries, Sagittarius, Taurus, Virgo, and
Capricorn.
[3070] See page 775, note 2.
[3071] King (1865), p. 7; Rose (1875), p. 335.
[3072] Ferry (1887), p. 69.
[3073] NH XXXVI, 56. Pliny, however, makes these statements about
chelonia and not chelonitis which follows it.
[3074] The stones which I have taken as examples are numbers 1, 3, 5,
18, 19, 39, and 57 respectively.
[3075] See above, chapter 29, page 689.