`_`	(the underscore) is the placeholder for exactly one character.
`%`	(the percent sign) is the placeholder for no, one or more than one character.
`%%`	(two percent signs) is the placeholder for no, one or more than one character, but not for blank space (so that a search ends at word boundaries).

Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, lat. 16659

s. XV (except for part III, dating from the first half of the 13^th c.).

Or.:

France (?).

Prov.:

part III belonged to Richard of Fournival, to Gerard of Abbeville (c. 1261) and to the college of Sorbonne (1272); part II was given to the college of Sorbonne by François Guillebon (d. 1534) and was bound together with part III in the 17^th c. No information regarding origin or provenance of part I.

Parchment, 101 f. Composite MS made of three parts, each copied by a single hand: I, f. 1-2; II, f. 3-71; III, f. 72-101. The first part, which contains the Ptolemaic section, consists of two folia reused as binding, whose f. 1 is at present inaccessible for the most part (see below).

Ptolemaica (single text) (f. 1-2). The other parts of the MS contain Bartholomew of Parma’s Breviloquium de fructu totius astronomie (3r-67v) and Abraham Avenezra’s Liber de rationibus tabularum (72r-101r). F. 68-71 and 101v are blank.

Bibl. L. Delisle, Inventaire des manuscrits de la Sorbonne conservés à la Bibliothèque Impériale sous les numéros 15176-16718 du fonds latin, Paris, 1870, 73; L. Delisle, Le cabinet des manuscrits de la Bibliothèque Nationale, II, Paris, 1874, 148 and III, Paris, 1881, 68; L. Thorndike, ‘Notes on Some Astronomical, Astrological and Mathematical Manuscripts of the Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris’, Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 20 (1957), 112-172: 155-160; R. H. Rouse, ‘Manuscripts Belonging to Richard de Fournival’, Revue d’Histoire des Textes 3 (1973), 253-269: 257; P. O. Kristeller, Iter Italicum, III, London-Leiden, 1983, 265; D. Juste, Catalogus Codicum Astrologorum Latinorum, II: Les manuscrits astrologiques latins conservés à la Bibliothèque nationale de France à Paris, Paris, 2015, 243-244; L. Miolo, Le fonds scientifique d’un collège de théologie: le cas de la bibliothèque de Sorbonne 1257-1500, PhD dissertation, Université Lumières Lyon 2, 2017, II, 171-173. My thanks to William Duba who identified the Ptolemaic text and called my attention to it.

1v–⁠2v	‘…t contra suos <parentes et dicet turpia et> mala dicta <et si fuerit infirmitas que est> serementum (?) <demonum, que est propter magnam> humiditatem <vincentem in cerebro, faciet eos> angustos et <stultitias, facient discohopertas,> insultabunt <in hominem et percutient et tal>es res facient — quas habet hec pars anime est id quod pertinet ad sapores corporis. <E>t diversitates, que proprie accidunt in parte…’ = Haly Abenrudian, Glosa super Quadripartito Tholomei (C.2.2) , fragment from III.15. F. 1 was glued on the inner front cover, making the text on the recto inaccessible, and a sheet of paper of smaller size (containing a brief description of the MS in a 19^th-c. hand) was glued on the verso, making about two thirds of it inaccessible. The last sentence (‘Et diversitates…’) repeats the beginning of Ptolemy’s lemma from the previous paragraph, a paragraph which was crossed out by the scribe, who added in the margin ‘vacat’. No glosses.

1v–⁠2v

‘…t contra suos <parentes et dicet turpia et> mala dicta <et si fuerit infirmitas que est> serementum (?) <demonum, que est propter magnam> humiditatem <vincentem in cerebro, faciet eos> angustos et <stultitias, facient discohopertas,> insultabunt <in hominem et percutient et tal>es res facient — quas habet hec pars anime est id quod pertinet ad sapores corporis. <E>t diversitates, que proprie accidunt in parte…’

= Haly Abenrudian, Glosa super Quadripartito Tholomei (C.2.2)

, fragment from III.15. F. 1 was glued on the inner front cover, making the text on the recto inaccessible, and a sheet of paper of smaller size (containing a brief description of the MS in a 19^th-c. hand) was glued on the verso, making about two thirds of it inaccessible. The last sentence (‘Et diversitates…’) repeats the beginning of Ptolemy’s lemma from the previous paragraph, a paragraph which was crossed out by the scribe, who added in the margin ‘vacat’. No glosses.