Text ‘(Paris, BnF, lat. 16208) Iudiciorum Ptolomei ad Aristonem filium suum liber incipit. Signorum alia sunt masculini generis, alia sunt feminini, scilicet ut Taurus, Cancer — neque amici neque inimici sunt ad invicem.’
Content A text in two parts (two books in Aristotle’s version), comprising (1) theoretical chapters on the planets and the signs of the zodiac, and (2) a collection of iudicia consisting mainly of interrogations based on the position of the ruler of the ascendant in the twelve houses and on the planetary hours.
Origin This text exists in two versions, one attributed to Ptolemy, the other to Aristotle, both of which seem to derive from a common, lost source which was probably translated or adapted from Arabic. Ptolemy’s version was used by Raymond of Marseilles in his Liber iudiciorum (1141) and gave rise to an anonymous commentary in which the year 1138 is taken as an example of astronomical calculation (C.4.6). The text – or the common source – may be as old as the tenth century for it shares characteristics in style and content, including several identical chapters, with the Alchandreana. The text is said to have been addressed by Ptolemy to his son ‘Aristo(n)’ (Aristotle’s version is said to have been addressed to king ‘Alco(n)’). The manuscripts listed below are those of Ptolemy’s version only. Aristotle’s version is extant in some 15 manuscripts, three of which attribute the text to Ptolemy: Madrid, BN, 10009, s. XIII, f. 109ra-117vb (‘Incipit Ptholomei liber… Explicit hic liber qui dicitur Tholomei’); Wolfenbüttel, HAB, 51.9 Aug. 4° (3549), s. XIII, f. 69r-91r (‘Hunc tractatum edidit Ptolomeus unus de regibus Egipti, nec est idem Ptolomeus qui edidit Almagestum vel Quadripartitum sed diversus’, added note at f. 69r); and Catania, BU, 87, s. XV, f. 89ra-101va (‘Incipit Ptholomei liber’). A reworking of the text is extant in Bernkastel-Kues, CSB, 209, and is possibly the work of Bartholomew of Parma (see C. Burnett, ‘Partim de suo et partim de alieno: Bartholomew of Parma, the Astrological Texts in MS Bernkastel-Kues, Hospitalsbibliothek 209, and Michael Scot’, in Seventh Centenary of the Teaching of Astronomy in Bologna, 1297-1997, eds P. Battistini, et al., Bologna, 2001, 37-76: 51-57).
Bibl. F. J. Carmody, Arabic Astronomical and Astrological Sciences in Latin Translation. A Critical Bibliography, Berkeley-Los Angeles, 1956, 17 (no. 7a-b) and 20 (no. 31); C. Burnett, ‘What is the Experimentarius of Bernardus Silvestris? A Preliminary Survey of the Material’, Archives d’Histoire Doctrinale et Littéraire du Moyen Age 44 (1977), 79-125: 81-84 (reprinted in C. Burnett, Magic and Divination in the Middle Ages. Texts and Techniques in the Islamic and Christian Worlds, Aldershot, 1996, XVII); C. B. Schmitt, D. Knox, Pseudo-Aristoteles Latinus. A Guide to Latin Works Falsely Attributed to Aristotle Before 1500, London, 1985, 35-37 (nos. 49-51); D. Juste, Les Alchandreana primitifs. Étude sur les plus anciens traités astrologiques latins d’origine arabe (Xe siècle), Leiden-Boston, 2007, 273-275; C. Burnett, ‘Aristotle as an Authority on Judicial Astrology’, in Florilegium Mediaevale. Études offertes à Jacqueline Hamesse à l’occasion de son éméritat, eds J. Meirinhos, O. Weijers, Louvain-la-Neuve, 2009, 41-62; D. Juste, ‘Les textes astrologiques latins attribués à Aristote’, in The Medieval Legends of Philosophers and Scholars (Micrologus XXI), Firenze, 2013, 145-164: 150-153.