This translation from the Arabic (in the anonymous version partially extant in MS Istanbul, Üniversitesi, A 6141, f. 1v-34v) is anonymous and undated in all manuscripts, but Charles Burnett convincingly argued that it was prepared by Hugo Sanctelliensis (fl. 1145-1147), on whom see C.3.1.2. As also shown by Burnett, Hugo knew Plato of Tivoli’s translation (A.2.1). The present translation was used by the author of the Speculum astronomie c. 1250 (see P. Zambelli, The Speculum astronomiae and Its Enigma: Astrology, Theology and Science in Albertus Magnus and His Contemporaries, Dordrecht-Boston-London, 1992, 226, 230 and 234), by Roger Bacon in Book IV of his Opus maius about 1266-1267 (ed. J. H. Bridges, The Opus Maius of Roger Bacon, I, London, 1897, 243-245) and by Henry Bate of Mechelen in the preface to his translation of Abraham Avenezra’s De mundo vel seculo in 1281 (ed. C. Steel, ‘Henry Bate’s Translation of Ibn Ezra’s Treatise The Book of the World’, Quaestio 19 (2019), 227-278: 247 l. 67-78; ed. S. Sela, Abraham Ibn Ezra Latinus. Henry Bate’s Latin Versions of Abraham Ibn Ezra’s Astrological Writings, with English Translation and a Collation with the Hebrew and French Source Texts, Leiden-Boston, 2022, 2 vols, II, 936-938).

Note A section of the text, opening with I.4 and of unknown length, was once contained in MS Florence, BNC, Conv. Soppr. J.III.28 (San Marco 180). See this MS under Note.

Text ‘(Vatican, BAV, Vat. lat. 4075) Liber quatuor tractatuum Ptholomei in scientia iudiciorum astrorum. (1r-18v) [book i] Et sunt in primo tractatu capitula viginti septem. De hiis hiis communiter que ad totum librum pertinent… (chapter index). (1v) Capitulum primum de hiis communiter que ad totum librum pertinent. Iuxta providam philosophorum assertionem quos videlicet in prescientia futurorum astris signa prebentibus — quasi cuiusdam fundamenti locum sortiuntur. Finitur primus tractatus. (18v-31v) [book ii] Et incipiunt capitula secundi: De partibus huius artis… (chapter index). Capitulum primum. De partibus huius artis. Cum omnia precepta et principalia que quasi quemdam in astronomiam — velud ordo postulat enarremus. (31v-42v) [book iii] Tractatus tertius Quadripartiti Ptholomei. Que sit inter prescriptos et presentes libros differentia… (chapter index). De differentia et convenientia huius libri. Presentis libri series cum suprascriptis in significatione — et que sunt ipsius proprietatis multiplicat. (42v-52v) [book iv] Tractatus quartus Quadripartiti Ptholomei. De terminis divitum et potentum… (chapter index). De terminis divitum et potentum. His igitur que ad intrinsecus tam corporis quam anime proprietates discernendum — adhibeatur intentio liquidius aperire sufficiet. Ad laudem omnipotentis Dei finitur Quadripartitus Ptholomei. Finitur liber quatuor partituum (!) sive tractatuum Ptholomei.’

Bibl. C. H. Haskins, Studies in the History of Mediaeval Science, Cambridge, 1927 (2^nd ed.), 111 n. 163; F. J. Carmody, Arabic Astronomical and Astrological Sciences in Latin Translation. A Critical Bibliography, Berkeley-Los Angeles, 1956, 18-19 (no. 10c); C. Burnett, ‘Hugo Sanctelliensis’s Version of Ptolemy’s Quadripartitum’ (forthcoming); C. Burnett, ‘Ptolemy’s Differentiation between Astronomy and Astrology in the Greek-Arabic-Latin Tradition’, Cahiers de Civilisation Médiévale. Xe-XIIe siècles (forthcoming).

Modern ed. ---