These four leaves probably are two doubleleaves of the same original quire. The last two leaves show late medieval numbers but the numbering is no longer visible on the first two leaves. The text on what is now the first leaf (fol. [44]) continues on the last leaf (fol. 45). As there are two leaves wanting between fol. 45 and fol. 48, we must also assume two missing leaves between fol. [44] and what is now the second leaf, which must therefore have been fol. [41]. The two doubleleaves probably formed the original inner and outer doubleleaves of the same quire. Apart from the text loss resulting from the four missing leaves, the text in this fragment omits several passages that are edited in PL 206, col. 460-462, 466-472, 475-478 and also presents a number of significant variant readings compared to that edition.