Numerical tables in the history of astronomy

In a sense, the book offers a chronological catalog of the development of the sets of tables, a history of progress in Latin astronomy. What the presented material does not allow, however, is a reconstruction of the reception of the individual sets. While it is clear for each set what tradition it is in, or how it has influenced the tradition, one cannot trace how long sets were used or where they continued to be copied. This would have been possible if the dating and provenance of considered manuscripts had been given. However, this information, which might be quite relevant for further research questions, would need to be assembled. The volume is written in a fluid, readable style. Complex content is presented in an understandable way. In particular, clarifying summaries, such as the discussion of the relationships between the Castilian and Parisian Alfonsine tables and the Alfonsine corpus (see pp. 238–239), are very illuminating and go far beyond a mere compilation of individual sets of tables. Technical definitions are interspersed only occasionally and rather unsystematically (e.g. the explanation of sidereal and tropical coordinates is given on p. 78 but the first use of the term can be found on p. 22). Since the book is aimed at a highly specialized audience and is primarily intended for use as a reference work, this approach is unproblematic; an explanatory glossary would probably have overloaded the book. The accompanying useful glossaries include lists of manuscripts, printed editions, incipits, and parameters and a combined index of persons and things. The latter allows for quick orientation, but it would have been desirable to highlight the most important references in bold, especially with the high-frequency keywords. But this wish is a marginal point and does not question the undisputed high value of this book, which is extremely useful for further research in the Latin manuscripts of late medieval Europe.