John Uri was a Hungarian who had studied Oriental literature under Schultens at Leyden, and was recommended to Archbishop Secker for the purpose of cataloguing the Bodleian Oriental MSS., by Sir Joseph Yorke, then ambassador in the Netherlands.[372] Many years were occupied in the preparation of the work, which appears to have commenced in 1766 and was not completed till 1787. In spite of the length of time which Uri occupied in his task, his successor, Pusey, found sufficient errors in it to fill sixty closely printed pages. In his preface to the second volume of the Catalogue, issued in 1835,[373] Pusey complains ‘Urius vero MSS. haud raro negligenter exscripsit’, and says that on re-examination of Uri’s work he discovered, ‘besides the errors which Uri himself would have admitted, that nearly all the purchasers of these books, Pocock alone excepted, had had spurious works foisted on them by wily Orientals. He therefore looked through all the books which Uri had enumerated, excepting the more common ones, to see if they corresponded to their titles or not. By doing this he discovered various irregularities. In some cases the titles had been covered over with paper or obliterated with ink, or practically erased with a knife. In others, by slight changes in the authors’ names, more famous people were indicated as responsible for the works. Lastly, by changing the pagination in some of the volumes fragments were represented as complete works, and a few pages of one work were even occasionally sewn on at the beginning of another.’[374] Uri’s errors will be the more readily condoned when it is remembered that he did not specialize on the Arabic MSS. alone, and that his work seeks to catalogue, _for the first time_, a two hundred years’ accumulation of Oriental MSS., including Hebrew, Aramaic, Syriac, Aethiopic, Arabic, Persian, Turkish, and Coptic writings. Nevertheless, Uri’s entry with reference to the present MS. deserves some of Pusey’s criticism. The MS. has three parts, each written in a different hand, the first and most important part being the supposed _Tractatus de Causis et Indiciis Morborum_, which covers folios 2-87. The second part is a fragment of some as yet unidentified medical work (folios 88-115); and the third, consisting of the first and last folios, gives us an introduction and an end piece to the first part. The alleged author and translator are named on the first page: هذا كتاب موسى ابن ميمون الفه للعموم قاطبا وقد نقله التميمي   الشيخ سليمان الحبشى المكنا بابن حبيش   في مملكة القدس الشريغة تم ‘This is the book of Mûsa ibn Maimûn which he put together as a compilation for general use. Al Tamimi, the sheikh Sulaiman the Abyssinian, known as Ibn Ḥubaish,[375] translated it in the noble city of Jerusalem. Finis.’ On the next page there is an introduction to the book which commences: