The 'De hebdomadibus' (DH) of Boethius presents a problem with the idea that ordinary finite substances are good and then proposes a solution to the problem. Careful reconstruction of Boethius’ arguments reveals that his solution relies on an account of finite goodness that he does not make explicit. Moreover, accounts of finite goodness that commentators have supplied to the DH should be rejected. Instead, the account of finite goodness given in book III of the 'Consolatio' successfully resolves the problem raised (...) in the DH. (shrink)
Boethius identifies God both with esse ipsum and esse suum. This paper explains Boethius's general semantic use of "esse" and the application of this use to God. It questions the helpfulness of attributing to Boethius "existence" words and argues for a more robust role in Boethius’s thought for Hilary of Poitiers’s and Augustine’s exegeses of Exodus 3:14-15 than has been acknowledged in recent scholarship.
While Boethius's definition of the person, ‘an individual substance of a rational nature’, plays a significant role in Christian theology and anthropology, its reception is by no means uncritical. In the last hundred years, virtually every element in it has been critiqued by theologians and secular scholars. Nevertheless, its context suggests that his understanding of the person is potentially far richer than supposed. This paper places Boethius's definition of the person in its historical framework and in the context of his (...) own thought, especially Contra Eutyches and Consolation of Philosophy, in order to demonstrate that despite shortcomings, it represents a dynamic and holistic characterisation of the person. (shrink)
In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reviewed by:Boethii Daci Aliorumque Sophismata by Boethius of DaciaJulie Brumberg-ChaumontBoethius of Dacia. Boethii Daci Aliorumque Sophismata. Edited by Sten Ebbesen and Irène Rosier-Catach. Corpus Philosophorum Danicorum Medii Aevi, 9. Odense: University Press of Southern Denmark, 2021. Pp. 624. Hardback, 400.00 DKK.This volume offers a reliable and accurate scholarly edition of two collections of thirteenthcentury sophismata (logical and grammatical puzzles) contained in ms. Brugge, Stedelijke Openbare Bibliotheek 509 (=B) and (...) ms. Firenze, Biblioteca Medicea-Laurenziana 12 sin. 3 (=F). Taken together, these two collections constitute a set of twenty-three sophismata called "Sophismata Florentino-Brugensia" in the catalogue published by Sten Ebbesen and Frédéric Goubier (A Catalogue of Thirteenth-Century Sophismata [Paris: Vrin, 2010]). These sophismata were previously available only in partial editions. Specifically, the two versions of the sophisma "Omnis homo de necessitate est animal," previously both ascribed to Boethius of Dacia, were partially edited from F by Grabmann in 1940 and from B by Roos in 1962. Other sophismata in this collection have been previously edited by Ebbesen, but their editions should now be considered "obsolete," according to the editor himself (9). Each sophisma is identified by an S followed by a number (S1, S2, etc.). In turn, each sophisma deals with several issues or problems, each one of which is identified by a P followed by a number (P1, P2, etc.). The volume is very usefully completed by an index of explicit and implicit references to other works and an index of parallel passages, both compiled by Kristian Thomsen Purreskov (591–601). Finally, this edition is accompanied by a selective but still rich index of words, where special attention has been dedicated to the sophismata by Boethius of Dacia (603–24). All the material is presented in a clear and accurate way. There are only a few minor material errors (specifically, the running titles for problems in S4 are messy; at 33, "a*" should be read as "b*"; at 49, "S14" should be read as "S18").Sten Ebbesen is the sole editor of all sophismata except for the three that deal with grammatical subjects, for which Irène Rosier-Catach is the main editor, with Ebbesen serving as a coeditor.Concerning the authorship of each sophisma, Ebbesen follows the indications contained in F, but he also provides some independent discussions (24–26). Thus, he ascribes two sophismata to Boethius of Dacia, ten to Peter of Auvergne, one to an otherwise unknown Nicholas of Normandy, and the remaining ten to anonymous masters. They are listed in detail in the "Index sophismatum et problematum" (65–69).After a summary of the contents of the volume, Ebbesen's introduction contains five sections of different lengths: first, a history of the edition (7–9); second, a general description of the structure and functioning of sophismata (9–13); third, a description of the seven manuscripts used for the edition (14–22); fourth, a discussion about authorship (22–58); and fifth, an explanation of the principles of the edition (58–62). In the third section, Ebbesen provides a wealth of information about manuscripts, stemma codicum, and evaluations of variants, especially about the relationship between S and B for the sophismata contained in both manuscripts. In this regard, Ebbesen establishes that B and F are probably not two independent reportationes of the same oral disputation, that they had a common ancestor, and that they do not depend on one another (25–32). The fourth section, about authorship, demonstrates that the collection contained in F is earlier than that contained in B. One major result is that the text copied in B (S1B) ("Omnis homo de necessitate est animal") is not by Boethius of Dacia (35). Because of F priority, that manuscript is chosen as the main witness for those sophismata or parts of sophismata that are common to F and B.The second section makes an extremely significant historical and doctrinal contribution to the history of logic, particularly the history of logical practices and their textual records. [End Page 705] Three constitutive parts of a sophisma are identified: first, the sophismatic sentence itself; second, a brief disputation (called here corpus sophismatis) about the sophismatic sentence... (shrink)
Boethius (480-524) Boethius was a prolific Roman scholar of the sixth century AD who played an important role in transmitting Greek science and philosophy to the medieval Latin world. His most influential work is The Consolation of Philosophy. Boethius left a deep mark in Christian theology and provided the basis for the development of mathematics, … Continue reading Boethius →.
The paper re-edits and discusses a medieval text that contains a syncrisis of Plato and Plautus. I argue that, in addition to fragments from lost comedies of Plautus, the text also contains a previously unrecognized fragment of the playwright Pacuvius. The same fragment seems to have been known to Remigius of Auxerre (or his model) when he wrote his commentary on consolatio Philosophiae of Boethius.
The De hebdomadibus (DH) of Boethius presents a problem with the idea that ordinary finite substances are good and then proposes a solution to the problem. Careful reconstruction of Boethius’ arguments reveals that his solution relies on an account of finite goodness that he does not make explicit. Moreover, accounts of finite goodness that commentators have supplied to the DH should be rejected. Instead, the account of finite goodness given in book III of the Consolatio successfully resolves the problem raised (...) in the DH. (shrink)
The modern global economy and discipline of economics place mathematical calculation above human concern. However, a re-reading of Boethius' The Consolation of Philosophy can positively highlight the contrast in values and spirit of the early medieval European world with our own scientific age. This book discusses the historical and cultural contexts that influenced Boethius' writing and explores how Consolation offers a radically different understanding of economic concepts: wealth from inner happiness and virtues, poverty from hoarding outer possessions, self-sufficiency in the (...) greater whole, enlightenment through misfortune, and development as fruition from the Good. These economic considerations resonate with a range of heterodox economic perspectives, such as Ecological and Buddhist Economics. The fundamental revaluations gained through Boethius pose a critique of mainstream neoclassical and neoliberal economics: to consumerism, avarice, growth and technology fetishism, and market rationality. These economic foundations resonate into a time when global crises raise the question of fundamental human priorities, offering alternatives to an ever-expanding industrial market economy designed for profit, and helping to avoid irrevocable socio-ecological disasters. The issues raised and questioned in this book will be of significant interest to readers with concern for pluralist approaches to economics, philosophy, classics, ancient history and theology. (shrink)
In this essay, I compare and contrast how Boethius, the author of Beowulf, J. R. R. Tolkien, and C. S. Lewis found ways to integrate their Christian theological and philosophical beliefs into a work that is set in a time and place that possesses the general revelation of creation, conscience, reason, and desire, but lacks the special revelation of Christ and the Bible. I begin by using Lewis’s own analysis of the Consolation in his Discarded Image to discuss what it (...) means for a Christian author to write in a pre-Christian mode. I find a model for such writing in Ecclesiastes, and discuss how Boethius, while confining himself to the pagan wisdom of Greece and Rome, points the way from philosophical consolation to theological transformation. I then use Tolkien’s ‘Beowulf: The Monsters and the Critics’ to unpack the distinction between the author’s Christian faith and the purely pagan consolation he offers to his characters, and locate that dynamic in the epic itself. Next, I explore how Tolkien, in imitation of Beowulf, balances a deep sense of loss and fatalism with an intimation of a higher providence guiding all. Finally, I show how Lewis, in imitation of Boethius, finds in the pagan world of his novel seeds of a greater revelation to come. (shrink)
The central issue in this article is to understand how is the relationship between the concept of "Being" and the meaning of "God" in Boethius' theological treatises. To this end, four issues are analyzed analytically-descriptively in Theological Treatises; 1. Why did Boethius raise the issue of ontology in Theological Treatises, and what was his purpose in distinguishing between "esse" and "id quod est" in these treatises with a purely Christian and theological nature? 2. The effect of this discussion in explaining (...) God' transcendence through the three attributes "necessity", "perfection" and "to being goodness" of being; 3. The effect of this discussion on God's "creation"; 4. Its effect on God' unity. The study of these cases led to the conclusion that Boethius, by distinguishing between "esse" and "id quod est", considers God to be a simple being in whom "esse" and "id quod est" are one, so being is necessary for Him. God' perfection is also due to His simplicity essence; because He is His own essence and substance, so any quantity and quality that is applied to God will be the carrying of substance. Boethius explains God' simplicity in terms of the originality of being and action, and equates God' being with the Goodness itself, but creatures that are not simple are something else in addition to being good. The Creator and the creature are substantial different, and His Ubiquity goes back to God' substance beyond the two categories of place and time. By distinguishing the abstract number from the concrete number, Boethius believes that the Trinity does not produces plurality, because there is no difference of merit in God and He is nothing but His own essence. (shrink)
Boethius’s De arithmetica, a Latin adaptation of Nicomachus of Gerasa’s Introduction to Arithmetic, was the only truly neo-pythagorean text available in the Latin Middle Ages. It played a major role in medieval education and thought, but its influence has not yet been fully explored. Studying the material remains is the best way to show the real place of the De arithmetica. Here is published for the first time a handlist of medieval commentaries on Boethius’s De arithmetica. This is the first (...) step toward writing a history of medieval neo-pythagoreanism. (shrink)
The series Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca et Byzantina: Series academica is published by the Berlin-Brandenburg Academy of Sciences, and functions as a complement to the series Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca et Byzantina: Sources and Studies. The editions and source collections of the Series academica provide a basis for research on Byzantine philosophy and education and on the lasting impact of peripatetic philosophy in the Greek middle ages. The series succeeds to the Commentaria in Aristotelem Graeca directed by Hermann Diels and (...) published by the Royal Prussian Academy of Sciences. The publication schedule of the series includes editions of commentaries by Alexander of Aphrodisias, Simplicius, John Philoponus, Michael of Ephesus, Nicephorus Blemmydes, George Pachymeres, Theodore Metochites, George Scholarius, and Bessarion. The series is also open for preliminary studies and companion volumes. https://www.degruyter.com/view/serial/CAGB-B. (shrink)
This chapter compares three different general accounts of personhood (Byzantine, Boethian, and Modern) and argues that if personhood is the basis on which one has equal moral status in the moral community and the disability-positive position is correct, then the Byzantine and Boethian accounts are preferable over the Modern accounts that are surveyed here. It further argues that the Byzantine account is even friendlier to a disability-positive position compared to the Boethian account.
The book called 'The Consolation of Philosophy' was throughout the Middle Ages, and down to the beginnings of the modern epoch in the sixteenth century, the scholar's familiar companion. Few books have exercised a wider influence in their time. It has been translated into every European tongue, and into English nearly a dozen times, from King Alfred's paraphrase to the translations of Lord Preston, Causton, Ridpath, and Duncan, in the eighteenth century.
An essential reference since the Middle Ages for European intellectuals, the work of Boethius contributed to the universalization of knowledge. This collective volume highlights the cultural heritage of this great classic from antiquity with its exemplary scientific eclecticism.
Die "Consolatio philosophiae" von Boethius war im Mittelalter ausserordentlich verbreitet. Als eines der wichtigsten Werke der mittelalterlichen Ethik und zugleich Schullektüre wurde sie häufig kommentiert und in die Volkssprachen übertragen. Die in MS. Hamilton 46 der Bodleian Library, Oxford, überlieferte, 1465 abgefasste Übersetzung ist eine von insgesamt vier noch erhaltenen deutschsprachigen Versionen der Trostschrift, die in der 2. Hälfte des 15. Jahrhunderts unabhängig voneinander entstanden sind. Nur im Oxforder Codex wird die deutsche Übersetzung mit ihrer lateinischen Vorlage samt lateinischer Glossen (...) überliefert. Dadurch ist eine einzigartige Grundlage gegeben, von der aus die Arbeitsweise und Intention des Übersetzers genau untersucht werden kann. In der vorliegenden Publikation wird der Boethius-Text der Hamiltoner Handschrift, der sich aus Grund-, Paratext und deutscher Übersetzung zusammensetzt und im Original nur sehr schwer zu lesen ist, zum ersten Mal in Form einer wissenschaftlichen Edition und Studie zugänglich gemacht. Der synoptischen Edition des lateinischen Basistextes samt vielschichtiger Glossen und der deutschen Fassung folgen ein vergleichender Kommentar und zwei Glossare, welche jeweils Übersetzungstechniken und Wortschatz eingehend erschliessen. Der Edition vorausgeschickt ist eine Studie, die sich mit der Sprache und Provenienz der Übertragung, ihrem Entstehungs- und Verwendungskontext, ihrer Stellung innerhalb der deutschen "Consolatio"-Tradition, ihrer Abhängigkeit vom lateinischen Text und den Glossen, mit dem lateinischen Grund- und Paratext sowie den unterschiedlichen Textherstellungsphasen detailliert befasst."--Page 4 of cover. (shrink)
Boethius is unique among Christian authors in late antiquity in that his account of deification makes no explicit reference to Christ. Instead, he develops a distinctly Neo-Platonic notion of deification, which he puts in the mouth of Lady Philosophy. According to Lady Philosophy, human beings are made divine through participation in God, who is understood as happiness itself, goodness itself, and unity itself. On the basis of this identification of happiness and God, Lady Philosophy concludes that the happiness human beings (...) desire can only be attained through deification. Although the argument of the Consolation suggest that a virtuous life, contemplation, and prayer are all necessary for attaining happiness and deification, there is no indication that they are sufficient for happiness and deification; nor does she specify what would be sufficient. The reason for her silence in this regard is presumably Boethius’ orthodox Catholic belief that salvation, and therefore deification, is only attainable through Christ. While Lady Philosophy, as Boethius portrays her, can identify that happiness is only attainable through deification, she cannot on her own sufficiently identify how to achieve deification. (shrink)
Introduction: -/- It is likely that Boethius (480-524ce) inaugurates, in Latin Christian theology, the consideration of personhood as such. In the Treatise Against Eutyches and Nestorius Boethius gives a well-known definition of personhood according to genus and difference(s): a person is an individual substance of a rational nature. Personhood is predicated only of individual rational substances. This chapter situates Boethius in relation to significant Christian theologians before and after him, and the way in which his definition of personhood is a (...) particular answer to the question, “Jesus has two natures, a divine nature and a human nature, but is one what?” Among Greek (and Syriac) speaking theologians, the typical answer is that Jesus is one ‘hypostasis’. Among Latin speaking theologians, the typical answer is that Jesus is one ‘persona’. It is Boethius’s definition of ‘persona’ that inaugurates personhood as such in Latin speaking theology. Although the Greek and Syriac theologians that I survey come close to a concept of personhood as a distinct category, they do not have such a concept and did not need it for their theological purposes. I show that Rusticus the Deacon is an early witness to this Latin theological invention, and also show that for later Latin theologians, the rationality condition for personhood does very little metaphysical work for their Trinitarian theology or Christology. -/- Further, this chapter surveys Patristic and Medieval Christian theologians’ answers to the question, “God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are one God, but each is one what?” The same replies as above are typically given by Christian theologians. These two theological questions frame the discussion about personhood (and ‘hypostasis’) and put a boundary around what a satisfying account of personhood (and ‘hypostasis’) would be. -/- In contemporary philosophy, there is a lot of attention paid to the rationality condition for personhood. But if we look at the text in which Boethius defines a person, we do not find any precise criteria for it. In other texts, he says that a rational being is one compatible with (capable of) thought and free choice of the will. What we find is that detailed discussion of personhood shows up in theological questions about the Trinity and Incarnation, but not in e.g., applied ethics. The intrusion of personhood into contemporary applied ethics with a focus on detailed and disputed criteria for rationality as a condition for personhood seems to be a modern development. From a Patristic and Medieval Christian theology point of view, trying to find just the right detailed criteria for rationality in order to define personhood is a wild goose chase. This chapter makes clear another contribution that Christian theology had for personhood. Given the theological issues at play in developing a notion of personhood, Christian theologians came to posit that e.g., an individual human is a person contingently (i.e. not essentially), but God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit are each a person essentially. The contingency for created persons is not based on whether e.g., an individual human has conscious acts (as might be the case for John Locke) but on the possibility of a divine person’s assuming e.g., an individual human nature. -/- This sampling of Christian intellectual history spans over one thousand years. I make no claim of being exhaustive. The chapter consists of six sections, where each section covers significant historical conversation partners who together represent the sorts of things that Patristic and Medieval Christian theologians where concerned with in theorizing about ‘persona’ or ‘hypostasis’. -/- 1. Origen of Alexandria and the Cappadocians: Basil of Caesarea and Gregory of Nyssa 2. Miaphysites: Severus of Antioch, John Philoponus, and Peter of Callinicum 3. Boethius and Rusticus the Deacon: Rationality, Subsistence, and the Invention of Personhood 4. Neo-Chalcedonians (II): Leontius of Byzantium 5. Scholastic Neo-Chalcedonians (I): Gilbert of Poitiers, Richard of St. Victor, William of Auxerre, Alexander of Hales, Bonaventure, Thomas Aquinas, and William of Ware 6. Scholastic Neo-Chalcedonians (II): Henry of Ghent, John Duns Scotus, and William of Ockham . (shrink)
_ Source: _Volume 56, Issue 3-4, pp 201 - 221 This paper summarizes medieval definitions and divisions of consequences and explains the import of the medieval development of the theory of consequence for logic today. It then introduces the various contributions to this special issue of _Vivarium_ on consequences in medieval logic.
Contemporary work on Boethius' Consolation of Philosophy often overlooks a discussion in CP.V.3 of a Peripatetic strategy for dissolving theological fatalism. Boethius’ treatment of this strategy and the lesson it provides about divine foreknowledge requires a reorientation of our understanding of the Consolation text. The result is that it is not foreknowledge nor any other temporally-conditioned knowledge that motivates Boethian concern but divine knowledge simpliciter.
Aux prises avec une archive en pleine expansion et une littérature secondaire dont la masse a atteint et, notamment depuis son tournant numérique, largement dépassé un seuil critique, l’archéologie philosophique a fait le deuil du rêve micrologique de « tout lire, tout étudier » que Michel Foucault s’était pourtant donné pour idéal régulateur en s’interdisant d’effectuer un tri en amont des « choses dites dans une culture, conservées, valorisées, réutilisées, répétées et transformées ». Il importe désormais moins de décrire la (...) totalité d’un champ que de tracer et de croiser des itinéraires. En gros, il s’agit de « raconter des intrigues », selon la formule bien connue de Paul Veyne. Arrimée à la philologie et à l’histoire des corpus, cette théâtralisation du travail philosophique n’est cependant pas arbitraire. Comme l’explique Alain de Libera dans l’un des rares propos métarchéologiques qu’il a livrés en marge de son œuvre canonique, face à l’« accumulation folle de connaissances et d’informations » qui caractérise l’environnement actuel de la recherche, « le rôle de l’historien-archéologue est d’identifier les bonnes structures ». Comment s’y prend-il ? « Il y a pour ce faire – poursuit Alain de Libera au cours du même « Grand entretien d’Actu-Philosophia » – un critère d’identification heuristique : la simplicité. La force d’une hypothèse de travail se mesure au nombre d’éléments qu’elle est capable d’intégrer et d’unifier, en un mot : de “simplifier” ». Parmi les intrigues qui ont marqué l’histoire récente de l’archéologie à vocation philosophique il y a sans doute l’« ἐπιστήμη alexandrinienne » qu’Alain de Libera a identifiée en étudiant les doctrines anciennes et médiévales de l’abstraction et qu’il a baptisée de la sorte pour souligner le rôle qu’Alexandre d’Aphrodise a joué dans sa genèse. Pour peu qu’il soit convaincu de son intérêt intrinsèque, le lecteur, surtout s’il se trouve être un antiquisant ou un médiéviste, résistera difficilement à la tentation de se demander s’il est possible de procéder à une extension – même ponctuelle – du « réseau aphrodisien » : peut-on élargir avec le même succès son domaine d’application en testant son pouvoir d’inclusion dans d’autres cas que celui de la filière qu’il était initialement destiné à synchroniser ? C’est une ébauche de simplification de cet ordre que mon hommage voudrait esquisser à partit de quelques textes qu’Alain de Libera a lui-même étudiés et selon une trajectoire parallèle à celle qu’il a lui-même tracée. (shrink)
Introduction: De disciplina scolarium and the Boethian corpus -- Reproduction and philosophical life in the Consolatio philosophiae -- De disciplina and Translatio studii -- Boethian humor -- "Bitwixen game and ernest": contrary Boethianism in Troilus and Criseyde -- Boethius and the humanists: Valla, Badius, and persistence of De disciplina in print.
In the commentaries on Porphyry Boethius on the one hand explains the properties of predication relation at abstract level, from another hand he supplies some ontological options about what can instantiate the terms of the relation, at the end he seems to prefer the similarities as objects of abstract thought. Other options are anyway present, in the commentary on Categories and in the Theological Treatises. One cannot say that the catalogues are complementary or that the same things are catalogued once (...) only, under the same label. On the contrary, objects such as forms, essences and material components can be considered from points of view that are different and not easily comparable. In the present article I will deal with Boethius’ ontological approach not strictly concerned with the Porphyrian text and riddle. (shrink)
In this study, Uhlfelder argues convincingly that, in portraying his literary persona as an exemplum of man in his quest for self-knowledge, Boethius has made the whole Consolatio a cosmic image representing man as microcosm. The mental faculties of sensus, imaginatio, ratio, and intellegentia are arranged as a proportion suggesting both Plato’s famous “divided line” at the end of Book 6 of the Republic and, at the same time, the four elements of the physical cosmos which, according to the Platonic (...) Timaeus, are connected with one another so as to form a geometrical proportion. The philosophical argument of the Consolatio in books II through V comprises another cosmic image with III. M.9 at its exact center; in addition, the other three cosmic depictions, revolving as concentric circles around III. M.9, may be viewed as forming an image of cosmic order. In its structure, then, Boethius’ work is an anagogic eikon which formally depicts its content. (shrink)
This volume contains the first modern commentary to Boethius's last logical monograph entitled 'De topicis differentiis', his most original work written around 522 A.D., just before the incarceration and death of the Roman philosopher. His textbook aims at providing a method for the discovery of arguments, that is an art that teaches how to solve any kind of question through the use of the topics, litteraly 'places' of our mind able to produce arguments subsequently developed into argumentations. Boethius inherited this (...) teaching from two different traditions, the Greek and Latin. In light of the differences found in them, the Roman scholar undertook the writing of the 'De topicis differentiis' precisely in order to show the possible way of reconciling these two philosophical traditions. In this way Boethius was able to disseminate a unified vision of this matter to the Latin world, restoring the centrality that the Topics had in the Aristotelian Logic and restoring their noblest function, that of being instruments at the service of the search for Truth. Finally, he also provided the list of the rhetorical topics by showing the differences with dialectical topics. This study provides a full reconstruction of the structure of the Boethian work, retraces and evaluates the sources, investigates the implications, and explains why the 'De topicis differentiis' remains a foundational work for anyone who wants to understand the development of European Logic through the Middle Ages and the Renaissance. (shrink)
Boethius fasst im 6. Jahrhundert den Plan, samtliche Werke Aristoteles' und Platons ins Lateinische zu ubersetzen und mit Kommentaren zu versehen. Die Motivation fur dieses Projekt liegt in seiner Einsicht in die bildungstheoretischen Grundlagen des Platonismus und des Aristotelismus begrundet, die ihm auch als Massstab fur seine ethischen Erkenntnisse und sein padagogisch orientiertes Schaffen dienen. Daruber hinaus liefert seine Sorge um die Anschlussfahigkeit dieser Bildungstradition an die gesellschaftlichen Bedingungen im lateinischsprachigen Raum seiner Zeit den entscheidenden Impuls. Ziel dieses Buches ist (...) es, Boethius' Ubersetzungsprojekt in die verschiedenen Ebenen der mit diesem Projekt verbundenen Wissenstransfers aufzuschlusseln und sowohl die Inhalte als auch die Bedingungen dieser Transfers aufzuzeigen. Die Ubersetzungen im engeren Sinne sind hierbei nur ein Teil des Wissenstransfers. Denn mit Blick auf die Sorge um eine gelingende Vermittlung der Inhalte fur die verschiedenen Niveaustufen seines Zielpublikums stellen die Kommentierungen und die Massnahmen der didaktischen Vermittlung einen integralen Bestandteil seines Ubersetzungsprojekts und damit weitere Wissenstransferebenen dar. Die Vorgehensweisen bei diesen verschiedenen Aspekten der Ubersetzung wiederum finden ihre Grundlage in den sprachphilosophischen und seelentheoretischen Einsichten, die fur Boethius' Konzeption einer gelingenden Vermittlung verantwortlich sind. Die Theorie der Sprache, die Boethius in seiner Bearbeitung der aristotelischen Schrift Peri hermeneias (bzw. De interpretatione) ins Lateinische ubertragt, bildet damit zugleich die Grundlage fur die Praxis seiner Ubertragung. (shrink)
In this chapter from a collection on the Stoici tradition, I explore Boethius’s works chronologically in order to elucidate his overall evaluation of Stoicism as a philosophy. It turns out that Boethius offers a "mixed review"' of Stoicism. Beginning with references to the Stoics in his logical works and then turning to the 'Consolation', I delineate the intelligible contours of Stoicism as Boethius sees it, including the positive impetus Stoicism provides toward a philosophical apprehension of reality as well as its (...) innate inadequacy for attaining the full measure of wisdom available to us through philosophical inquiry. (shrink)
Throughout Antiquity and the Middle Ages, literature was read with the ear as much as with the eye: silent reading was the exception; audible reading, the norm. This highly original book shows that Boethius's Consolation of Philosophy--one of the most widely-read texts in Western history--aims to affect the listener through the designs of its rhythmic sound. Stephen Blackwood argues that the Consolation's metres are arranged in patterns that have a therapeutic and liturgical purpose: as a bodily mediation of the text's (...) consolation, these rhythmic patterns enable the listener to discern the eternal in the motion of time. The Consolation of Boethius as Poetic Liturgy vividly explores how in this acoustic encounter with the text philosophy becomes a lived reality, and reading a kind of prayer. (shrink)
Die "Consolatio Philosophiae," spatantikes Meisterwerk des Boethius, fungiert seit ihrer Wiederentdeckung durch Alkuin am Ende des 8. Jahrhunderts als Ausgangspunkt zahlreicher Kommentare und Ubersetzungen, die fur die europaische Geistesgeschichte pragend sind. Dieses Buch beleuchtet eine noch grossenteils unerforschte Texttradition: Franzosische Consolatio-Versionen des Mittelalters und der Fruhen Neuzeit bilden den Gegenstand der Analyse, bei der translatorische Strategien, diskursive Vernetzungen mit anderen Texten und Traditionen sowie sprachhistorische Entwicklungen sichtbar werden. Zur umfassenden Ermittlung komplexer Sinnstiftung werden jeweils historisches Umfeld, Paratextualitat und Textstruktur sowie (...) lexikalische und metrisch-rhetorische Besonderheiten der Ubersetzungen herausgestellt. (shrink)
_ Source: _Volume 53, Issue 2-4, pp 170 - 193 Boethius identifies beings that _are in_ a subject with what the Scholastics called predicamental accident, and predication by accident with the predication of what _is in_ a subject. The first of these questionable assimilations went on to become terminology commonly accepted by Scholastics of all eras. On the other hand, the second, which seems quite consistent with the thinking of Aristotle, was only admitted with many reservations, probably because of the (...) bewildering claims of Aristotle in _Cat._ 5, 2a27-34 about the predication of what _is in_ the subject. In what follows I will try to show how these phrases, properly understood, are consistent with the idea that what _is in_ the subject is said by accident of the substance, although they implicate a difficulty poorly resolved by Boethius himself and those who followed him on this point, of whom I will only mention by way of example some Scholastics from the 16th century. (shrink)
According to Plutarch, the theory of psychological disharmony relies on the Platonic music harmony. When Plato refers to music harmony, he means the kind of harmony where the concept of God is the source through which all beings emanate. The mental passions define the quality of human character and consequently develop the social man. As far as the Aristotelian ethical theory is concerned, morality does not condemn the passions, because it has a clear ontological and anthropological basis. The Stoics stress (...) that a trait of the human soul is sociality, and that happens because all human beings are under the law of sympathy and constitute a whole. At medieval times, Boethius portrays the middle age social conditions which also resemble with our postmodern societies. (shrink)
Anicius Manlius Seuerinus Boethius has been regarded one of the major sources of Platonism in the Middle Ages, and the influence of different Platonists on his thought has been widely discussed. In his Aristotelian commentaries, however, Boethius rejects Platonists’ opinions while saying that Aristotle and Plato essentially agree. Boethius may have intended to show the agreement he saw, but did not provide any explanation in his works. In this article, I consider how Boethius could have seen such an agreement. While (...) reexamining past remarks about Platonism in Boethius, I conclude that he adopts Porphyry’s view that Aristotelian logic functions as a step toward the metaphysical appreciation of the universe, which Platonists consider to be the most essential form of philosophy. However, Boethius follows Iamblichus in holding that the highest level of metaphysical appreciation involves mathematization. (shrink)
Arithmetic was one of the seven liberal arts taught in the French schools just before the middle of the twelfth century, and Boethius’s De arithmetica was the principal textbook for this art. This volume provides an edition of a commentary on the De arithmetica; the accompanying introduction identifies the author of the commentary as Thierry of Chartres, and provides a careful consideration of how the commentary reflects his philosophy. Unlike the commentaries on Plato's Timaeus and on Boethius's Consolatio philosophiae, medieval (...) exegesis of Boethius's De arithmetica has seldom been subjected to comprehensive and systematic enquiry. Inhabiting the shifting boundary between philosophy and history of science, the De arithmetica itself has been neglected by most medievalists. Yet, from the Carolingian renaissance onward, when the scholarly curriculum came to be based on the seven liberal arts, Boethius's work soon became a canonical text for the study of arithmetic. Indeed, the growing interest in it during the twelfth century is attested by the large number of surviving commentaries in manuscript. (shrink)