Simon of Faversham, Quaestiones novae Simonis Anglici super liber Elenchorum
F-o5mz
General Information
Original Condition
Outermost bifolium of a quaternion.
The inside surface is visible, and the verso page corresponds to 2 1/4 pages of the edition, notably beginning at 2 1/4 pages into the edition (p. 103, 1/4 page down) and going to 4 1/2 pages in (p. 105, 1/2 page down). The recto page corresponds to the top of page 133 in the edition, so approximately 27 1/2 pages are in between, meaning 12 pages, or three bifolios. Since it is likely that the quire began with the text, the original manuscript probably was in quaternions, containing the text across four of them.
Line height 3.6-3.8 mm. All measurements based on photogrammetry from reference images. From the edition, it appears that 9 (va), 10 (vb) or 11 (ra) lines are currently not visible.
Current Condition
Content
-
Content Item
- Persons Simon of Faversham
- Text Language Latin
- Title Quaestiones novae super libro Elenchorum
-
Content Description
verso: Prologus, (ed. Ebbesen et al., p. 103, l. 68) (certam...) - q. 1, (ed. Ebbesen et al., p. 105, l. 66) (...loyce).
recto: q. 12 (ed. Ebbesen et al., p. 133, l. 67): "/litus aratus. Tercius autem modus est quando..." - q. 13 (?).
The verso side follows the edition text fairly closely. On q. 1, l. 38, col. a shares with edition MS O the variant reading orationes against MSS MV. On l. 65, the situation is a little more complex. The edition records the following text and variants:
Ebbesen et al. ed., l. 65 (V?): et aliud est quod ars sophistica
M: aliud est quod ars sophistica
O: et aliud quod ars sophistica
This MS, va: et aliud quod sophistica est
Incidentally, the manuscript routinely gives the reading sophistica where the edition has ars sophistica.
The recto side, however, shows considerable deviations from the edition, suggesting a different redaction. Moreover, two marginal additions correct homoeteleutic errors. At the bottom of the left column (ra), one such variant can be compared to the edition:
Ebbesen et. al., pp. 133-134, ll. 20-24: "Oppositum arguitur: Quod determinat sibi unum oppositorum, ipsum ut sic non est in potentia ad alterum. Sed oratio actu prolata in sensu composito determinat sibi unum oppositorum, quoniam sensum compositum. Ideo etc. Sed si esset distinguenda, ipsa esset in potentia ad sensum divisum. Ergo oratio actu prolata in sensu composito ipsa non est distinguenda."
This MS, ra: "Oppositum arguitur: Quod determinat sibi unum oppositorum ut sic non est in potentia ad alterum; sed oratio actu prolata in sensu composito determinat sibi unum oppositorum, puta sensum compositum; ergo oratio prolata in sensu composito \non est in potentia ad sensum divisum, et per consequens oratio actu prolata in sensu composito add. in pede columnae alia manu/ non est distinguenda."
At the passage corresponding to l. 28 in the edition (and where MS V omits a 20+ line passage as redundant), the text in this manuscript no longer tracks well against the edition.
- Glosses and Additions At the bottom of columns where a new question begins, the title of the question is written, as with MS O (and MS α conjectured by the editors).
- Edition Simon of Faversham, Quaestiones super libro Elenchorum, ed. S. Ebbesen, T. Izbicki, J. Longeway, F. Del Punta, E. Serene, E. Stump, Toronto 1978.
History
Ex libris on host volume, f. 1r:
Doctor Wolfgangus Sysen(?) legavit
B.M.V. Aichae
Ad usum Fratrum Minorum Schrobenhausen, 1709
Host Volume
Digitization available:
Other available descriptions
-
H. Hauke and W.-V. Ikas, Katalog der lateinischen Fragmente der Bayerischen Staatsbibliothek München, Band 3, Clm 29550-29990, Wiesbaden 2013.
Show description