Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-29T17:24:25.777Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Boethius in the Carolingian Schools1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 February 2009

Margaret T. Gibson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The medievalist who goes to Pavia will visit first and most reverently the church of San Pietro Ciel d'Oro. It is an eighth-century foundation, reformed by Cluny in the tenth and much rebuilt and altered over the years. But you do not go to it for the architecture, nor for the gilded ceiling—long tarnished; you go to salute the relics: in the crypt, Boethius; on the high altar St Augustine of Hippo. There you have the categories of medieval scholarship, which found its subject-matter in Augustine and its language in Boethius. These are easy generalizations. What we must consider are the harder, practical questions of Boethius' entry into the western academic tradition. To what extent and why was he an influence on the learning of the early Middle Ages? He conveyed the classical heritage to the medieval west, no doubt— but how and when?

Type
Research Article
Information
Transactions of the Royal Historical Society , Volume 32 , December 1982 , pp. 43 - 56
Copyright
Copyright © Royal Historical Society 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

2 Bullough, D. A., ‘Urban change in early medieval Italy: the example of Pavia’, Papers of the British School at Rome, xxxiv (1966), 127Google Scholar; Sackur, E., Die Cluniacenser (2 vols., Halle, 1892–1894), i, 108Google Scholar.

3 The relics were in Pavia by the thirteenth century, when the cult is attested by an accessus to the De Consolatione Philosophiae (Cappuyns, M., ‘Boèce’, Dictionnaire d' Histoire el de Géographie Ecclésiastiques (Paris, 1937), ix, 357–8Google Scholar, citing Vita VI and a Pavian relic-list of 1236).

4 Martindale, J. R., The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire (Cambridge, 1980), ii, 233–7Google Scholar, with references.

5 Martindale, , Prosopography, ii, 905Google Scholar. Cf. especially Pauly-Wissowa, , Realencyclopädie der dassischen Altertumswissenschaft, XXII, ii (Stuttgart, 1954), cols. 2328–46Google Scholar.

6 For the range and depth of Martianus' pagan learning, see Lenaz, L., Martiani Capellae 'De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii' liber secundus (Padua, 1975)Google Scholar, and Shanzer, D., ‘A Philological and Philosophical Commentary on Martianus Capella's De Nuptiis Philologiae et Mercurii’ (Unpublished D.Phil, thesis, Oxford, 1980)Google Scholar.

7 Martindale, , Prosopography, ii, 1044–6Google Scholar. Symmachus was also one of the patrons of Priscian (Ibid., 1045, with references).

8 De Arithmetica praef. (ed. Friedlein, G. (Leipzig, 1867: Teubner), p. 5)Google Scholar.

9 If the De Consolatione Philosophiae was actually written in prison, within a few months of the fall of Symmachus himself, there may be some doubt as to whether he ever saw it. But see Chadwick, H., Boethius: The Consolations of Music, Logic, Theology and Philosophy (Oxford, 1981), pp. 254–7Google Scholar.

10 See Cappuyns, M., ‘Cassiodore’, Dictionnaire d'Histoire et de Géographic Ećclesiastiques (Paris, 1949), XI, 1388–1399Google Scholar, and Momigliano, A., ‘Cassiodoro’, Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani, xxi (Rome, 1978), 494–504Google Scholar.

11 Bischoff, B., ‘Die europäische Verbreitung der Werke Isidors von Sevilla’, Mittelalterliche Studien (Stuttgart, 1966), i, 171–94Google Scholar.

12 This was movingly demonstrated by the exhibition Karl der Grosse held in Aachen in 1965.

13 Turin, Bibl. Naz., MS F. IV. 1, fasc. 3. See Lowe, E. A., Codices Latini Antiquiores (Oxford, 1947), iv, 450Google Scholar.

14 Aldhelmi Opera, ed. Ewald, R. (Berlin, 1919Google Scholar: Mon. Ger. Hist. Auct. Ant. XV), indices ad loc.

15 De Sanctis Euboricensis Ecclesiae, lines 1547–9. (ed. Duemmler, E.) (Berlin, 1881: Man. Ger. Hist. Poet. Lat. Aev. Carol, i, p. 204)Google Scholar.

16 See Hadot, P., Marius Victorinus: reckerchessur sa vie et ses oeuvres (Paris, 1971): Etudes Augustiniennes, pp. 163–86, 329–62Google Scholar.

17 Cassiodorus, , Institutiones II, iii, 18 (ed. Mynors, R. A. B. (Oxford, 1937), pp. 128–9)Google Scholar. The textual tradition is exceptionally complex. For some of the hazards, see Courcelle, P., ‘Histoire d'un brouillon cassiodorien’, Revue des Études Anciennes, xliv (1942), 65–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar, summarized by Hadot, , Marius Victorinus, pp. 105–8Google Scholar.

18 Migne, , Patrologia Latina, ci, 951BGoogle Scholar. See further Aristoteles Latinus Codices: Supplementa Altera, ed. Minio-Paluello, L. (Bruges/Paris, 1961), no. 2163Google Scholar. The original presentation copy does not survive.

19 C.: Genus, quid est? A.: Genus est proprie quod speciebus differt; et quid sit ea substantia, de qua quaeris, communi uocabulo ostendit, ut animal. Per singulas enim species, id est, hominis, equi, bouis, leonis, et caeterorum, genus est animal, et aequaliter de omnibus praedicatur (Alcuin, , Dialectica ii (Patrologia Latina, ci, 953BC))Google Scholar.

20 C.: Vnde dicitur substantia? A.: Substantia dicitur, quia subsistit, ut est unaquaeque natura in sua proprietate. C.: Quot sunt accidentia? A.: Corporalibus naturis nouem. (Ibid., iii (col. 954D): ut corrected from et after Oxford, Bodleian Library, MS Junius 25).

21 The scribal colophons from a lost sixth-century manuscript containing some logical works of Boethius are preserved in a book from Fleury (Orléans, Bibl. Mun., Ms 267 (223), plus Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS. Nouv. acq. lat. 1611 (s.x/xi)). They indicate that this collection, which was a corrected fair copy made by an imperial scribe, included the De Definitionibus of Marius Victorinus. See Aristoteles Latinus Codices: Supplemental Altera, nos. 2055 and 2080.

22 C.: Perihermeniarum subtilitates a te audire desidero, de quibus dictum est, Aristotelem in mente tinxisse calamum, dum eas scriptitabat (Dialectica xvi (Patrologia Latina, ci, 972C) quoting Cassiodorus, , Institutiones II, iii, 11 (ed. Mynors, , p. 114)Google Scholar).

23 Lehmann, P., Mittelalterliche Bibliolhekskataloge Deutschlands und der Sckweiz i (Munich, 1918), pp. 250Google Scholar (Reichenau) and 71— ‘libri scottice scripti’ —87, 89 (StGall).

24 Ep. 8, lines 6–8 (ed. Duemmler, E. (Berlin, 1925: Mon. Ger. Hist. Epp. Karol. Aev. IV), p. 20)Google Scholar.

25 Ep. 16, lines 24–30: ed. Duemmler, p. 24.

26 See Turner, E. G., The Typology of the Early Codex (University of Pennsylvania, 1977), pp. 102–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

27 The best guide to a very difficult area is still Quadr, R., I ‘Collectanea’ di Eirico di Auxerre (Friburg, 1966: Spicilegium Friburgense II), pp. xii–xv, 3–28Google Scholar. See now also Marenbon, J., From the Circle of Alcuin to the School of Auxerre (Cambridge, 1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, especially for the discussion of ninth-century commentary on the De Decent Categoriis.

28 Paris, Bibl. Nat., MSlat. 12949: Lacombe, G. et al. , Aristoteles Latinus (Rome, 1939), no. 621Google Scholar.

29 Prima questio est utrum genera et species uere sint, sed sciendum est quod non esset disputare de eis, si non uere subsisterent. nam res omnes que uere sunt sine his esse non possunt … An corporalia sint an incorporalia: quod duobus modis accipitur. nam genus, si in eo quod genus sit, non que res natura constet, consideratur, semper incorporale est. uerbi gratia, si substantia, quod est genus, non consideratur in eo quod substantia est, sed in eo quod sub se speties habet, incorporalis est. item si speties q(ue) est homo consideratur tantummodo in eo quod sub genere est, incorporalis est et ipse (ed. Baeumker, C. and von Waltershausen, B. S. Freiherr (Münster-i. W., 1924: Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophic des Mittelalters XXIV, i), pp. 30–1)Google Scholar.

30 Turin, Bibl. Naz., MS F. IV. 1, fasc. 3. See note 13 above.

31 Ep. 5: ed. Duemmler, pp. 16–17. For a visit to Seligenstadt, see Ep. 4, p. 15, lines 12–21, and Ep. 5, p. 16, lines 4–5.

32 Bamberg, Staatsbibl., MS class. 5 (HJ.IV.12). For the date, see Schramm, P. E. and Mütherich, F., Denkmale der deutschen Könige und Kaiser (Munich, 1962), no. 41Google Scholar.

33 Fol. 2v (Symmachus) and 9v (quadrivium), reproduced by Koehler, W., Die Karolingischen Miniaturen: plates volume I (Berlin, 1930), pl. 90Google Scholar. For the Ottonian four provinces, see e.g. Schramm and Miitherich, Denkmale, no. 108.

34 The complete Latin text (16 lines) is given by Schramm and Mütherich, Dmkmale, no. 41, who identify the recipient as Charles the Bald on the conclusive evidence of line 2: Inuicto pollens nomine Caesar aui.

35 Weitzmann, K., Die Byzantinische Buchmalerci des 9 und 10 Jahrhunderts (Berlin, 1935: Archäologisches Institut des deutschen Reiches, Abteilung Istanbul), p. 8 and pl. 39–41Google Scholar, also citing Koehler, , Karolingischen Miniaturen, pl. 91Google Scholar.

36 Friedlein, G., Boetii de Institution/ Arithmetica libri duo (Leipzig, 1867: Teubner), p. 1Google Scholar.

37 The Bible (Hildesheim, Domschatz, MS 61) is discussed by Nordenfalk, C., ‘Noch eine Turonische Bilderbibel’, Festschrift Bemhard Bischoff, ed. Authenried, J. and Brunhölzl, F. (Stuttgart, 1971), pp. 153–63Google Scholar. The De Arithmetica (Hildesheim, Domschatz, MS 31) is conventionally described as Bemward's liber mathematicus and thus dated much too late. See Algermissen, K., Bernward und Godehard von Hildesheim: ihr Leben und Wirken (Hildesheim, 1960), p. 135Google Scholar.

38 Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS lat. 12949, fol. 38V–9V. See note 28 above. The text is printed as additamentum to the letters of Lupus of Ferrières (ed. Duemmler, pp. 114–17). For a persuasive argument in favour of Lupus himself as the author, see Beeson, C. H., ‘The authorship of Quid sit ceroma’, Classical and Medieval Studies in honor of E. K. Rand, ed. Jones, L. W. (New York, 1938), pp. 1–7Google Scholar [referring to Paris, Bibl. Nat., MS lat. 12949, not 12947, as p.I ].

39 Nonnulli ceroma intellexerunt esse artificium quoddam iuxta morem antiquum pingendi; cui, ne facies et pulchritudo picturae uetustate temporis aboleretur, cerae mixtura apponebatur, modico igni huic temperamento adiecto, ut aequa mensura colorum ceraeque concordante, nee uenustas et gratia coloribus nee cerae perspicuitas deesset (ed. Duemmler, p. 116, lines 24–8).

40 De Arithmetica praef. (ed. Friedlein, , p. 4, lines 1–9 abridged)Google Scholar. I have introduced the bee-hive to explain ‘rustica obseruatione decerptae’. For a surviving example of en-caustic painting on canvas, see the seventh-century icon of the Virgin and Child from S. Maria Nova, Rome (Cellini, P., ‘Una Madonna molto antica’, Proporzioni, iii (1950), 1–9, pl. i–ixGoogle Scholar; and Kitzinger, E., ‘A Virgin's face: antiquarianism in twelfth-century art’ The Art Bulletin, lxii (1980), 6–19, giving the now accepted date)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

41 Variat I. xlv, lines 62–77 (ed. Fridh, Å. J. (Turnhout, 1973: Corpus Christianorum Series Latina xcvi), pp. 50–1)Google Scholar.

42 Variae, lines 39–49: p. 50.

43 The best evidence for Einhard's position at Aachen is his Old Testament sobriquet, Beseleel, the man who designed and adorned the Ark of the Covenant (Exod. 37–38:22). See Alcuin, Letter 172 (ed. Duemmler, E.: Mm. Ger. Hist. Epp. Karol. Aev. ii, 285)Google Scholar and Strabo, Walafrid, De Imagine Tetrici 221–3Google Scholar (ed. Duemmler, E.: Poet. Lat. Aev. Karol. ii, 377)Google Scholar.

44 Cassiodorus, , Institutions II. iii. 18, iv. 7, vi. 3 (ed. Mynors, , pp. 128–9, 140, 152)Google Scholar. In the letter just quoted, Cassiodorus refers in addition to translations of Pythagoras (music) and Ptolemy (astronomy): Variae I. xlv (ed. Fridh, p. 49, lines 23–4). See now Pingree, David, ‘Boethius' Geometry and Astronomy’, Boethius: his life, thought and influence, ed. Gibson, M. T. (Oxford, 1981), pp. 155–61Google Scholar.

45 See for example Bamberg, Staatsbibl., MS class. 9 (HJ IV. 19), a tenth-century manuscript of unknown origin that was acquired by the cathedral library.

46 See White, Alison, ‘Boethius in the Medieval Quadrivium’, Boethius, ed. Gibson, , pp. 162–205Google Scholar. The De Musica appears in the list of manuscripts written or acquired by Reginbert at Reichenau in 835/42 (Lehmann, , Mittelalterliche Bibliothekskataloge, p. 258, lines 24–5)Google Scholar.

47 The Fleury manuscript is now Orléans, Bibl. Mun., MS 270(226), containing the Opuscula Sacra and the De Consolatione Philosophiae (See Daly, E. J., ‘An early ninth-century manuscript of Boethius’, Scriptorium, iv (1950), 205–19, pl. 29–32)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. The Reichenau manuscript is now Karlsruhe, Badische Landesbibl., MS Aug. xviii, containing Opuscula Sacra I–IV within a credal collection that includes Alcuin's letter 289, a circumstance that in itself points to Tours as the place of origin. I am much indebted here to the advice of Professor Donald Bullough.

48 See Chadwick, , Boethius: The Consolations, pp. 174–222Google Scholar.

49 See the Auxerre manuscript already discussed (n. 28, above).

50 Cappuyns, M., ‘Le plus ancien commentaire des “Opuscula Sacra” et son origine’, Recherches de Théologie Ancimne et Médiévale, iii (1931), 237–72Google Scholar.

51 Alcuin, , Dialectica iGoogle Scholar: Migne, , PL ci, 952A–DGoogle Scholar.

52 MS Rome, Marist Fathers, s.n. See Aristoteles Latinus Codices: Supplement Allera, no. 2163, with bibliography.

53 See further Gibson, M. T., ‘The Opuscula Sacra in the Middle Ages’, Boethius, ed. Gibson, , p. 220Google Scholar.

54 The De Vera Philosophia is a convenient title for what is printed (Patrologia Latina ci, 849C–54A, following Frobenius) as the preface to Alcuin's De Grammatua. Its dependence on the De Consolatione Philosophiae is discussed by Courcelle, P., La ‘Consolation de philosophie' dans la tradition littéraire’ (Paris, 1967: Étudts Augustiniennes), pp. 33–46, 373–5Google Scholar, and by Brunhölzl, F., Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters (Munich, 1975), i, 270–1Google Scholar.

55 Peiper, R., A. M. S. Boetii Philosophiae Consolationis Libri quinque (Leipzig, 1871: Teubner), pp. xxivxxixGoogle Scholar. Cf. the helpful analysis by Brown, Virginia, ‘Lupus of Ferrières on the metres of Boethius’, Latin Script and Letters A.D. 400–900: Festschrift presented to Ludwig Bieler, ed. O'Meara, J. J. and Naumann, B., (Leiden, 1976), pp. 63–79Google Scholar.

56 A good early example is Orléans, Bibl. Mun., MS 270 (226), p. 184. See Daly, , ‘Manuscript of Boethius’, pl. 29 = De Consolatione Philosophiae IV, m. viGoogle Scholar.

57 See Page, C., ‘A new song from Saxon Canterbury’, Boethius, ed. Gibson, , pp. 306–11Google Scholar. We owe several new examples of neumed metres to the vigilance of Dr. G. Powitz of the Stadt-und Universitatsbibliothek, Frankfurt, who drew attention to MS fragm. lat. I. 56 (s.xi).

58 Silk, E. T., Saeculi Noni Auctoris in Boetii Consolationem Philosophiae Commentarius (Rome, 1935: American Academy), p. 217Google Scholar.

59 Thilo, G. and Hagen, H., Servii Grammatici Commentarii (Leipzig, 1887), III, i, 356Google Scholar.

60 These examples are taken from London, British Library, MS Harley 3095, fol. 7iv–2r, a tenth-century manuscript from the Rhineland, which well represents the long-established habit of interlinear glossing.

61 See Gruber, J., Kommentar zu Boethius ‘De Consolatione Philosophiae’ (Berlin/New York, 1978), pp. 315 19 et passimGoogle Scholar.