Boèce. Traité de la Musique. Introduction, traduction et notes

[Couverture]

CARMINAPHILOSOPHIAE(©IBS)|Volume14,2005,p.167-176

• Review ~ Essay •

I

H

,

P

.

D.

|

HDR

Boèce. Traité de la Musique. Introduction, traduction et notes by Christian Meyer, Turnhout (Brepols), 2004 • ISBN 2-503-51741-2 1 –

352 pages | Large trade paperback | 45 €

• English version •

Boethii De institutione musica libri quinque:

auctor, opus, interpres

ILLO HUMPHREY, PH. D. | HDR Mediævalist | Musicologist | Proto-Philologist

(Université Paris X – Nanterre | 2004 | 2014)

he very timely publication by Christian Meyer of the Boethii De musica fills in a long-standing gap in the realm of mediaeval proto-philology in general, and in that of scientific-philosophical research on the teachings of the Platonist Boethius in particular. Indeed, this publication makes accessible for the first time in the French language one of the major treatises of the Pythagorean and Platonic Tradition of Knowledge: Boethii De institutione musica libri quinque (On the Fundamentals [and canonical Teachings of the Philosophy and Science] of Music in five Books). The Boethii De instiutione musica was written in the early stages of his career, probably between the years a. D. 500 and a. D. 510. This major scientific-philosophical work is in fact an integrated tri-disciplinary treatise, uniting into one the philosophy of the cognitive process (ἡ

γνώμη: cognitio) including the faculty of perception by the five

senses (ἡ αἰσθητήριον: sensuum perceptio), the philosophy of numbers and proportions (ἡ ἀριθμητικὴ τέχνη: ars arithmetica), and the philosophy of the formation of musical sounds (ὁ ϕθόγγος), musical intervals, and musical consonances (ἡ μουσικὴ τέχνη: ars musica). In publishing this work, Christian Meyer provides us with an excellent French translation of this very complex treatise, and puts at the disposal of the international research community a useful tool, which will allow in particular the new generation of French-speaking philosophical scientists, epistemologists, musicologists and proto-philologists to meditate upon the traditional teachings of Boethius and to absorb them at their on pace; it will also allow them, in a second phase, to eventually reintroduce these teachings back into the school curricula as of the elementary level, just as was the case in the Carolingian and post-Carolingian schools from the 9th

to the 16th _{century, curricula whose original blue-print was drawn}

up of course by the great Alcuinus Euboricensis (Alcuin of York, *ca.730 – †804).

[¶ 1] Before passing in review the different aspects of this publication, it is useful first to bring back to mind a few details of the life of Boethius, and then to put into perspective a part of the manuscript tradition of the treatise De institutione musica libri quinque.

Anicius Manlius [Torquatus] Seuerinus Boethius, descendant of the Anicii family, was born in Rome, around the year 480, and died under torture “in agro Calventiano” just on the outskirts of Pavia around the year 524. His father Flavius Narius Manlius Boethius (or Flavius Nonius Arius Manlius Boethius), was senator and præfectus Augustalis (i.e. Prefect of Egypte) in the year 475-476, and, according to his father’s consular diptych (487), today conserved in Italy in the Musei d’Arte e Storia (i.e. i Civici Musei) of Brescia, he was also uir clarissimus et inluster ex præfecto praetorio præfectus urbi secundo consul ordinarius et patricius. Orphan at an early age, Boethius became the adopted son of Quintus Aurelius Memmius Symmachus (†ca. 525), and later as an adult his son-in-law, having married one of Symmachus’ three daughters Rusticiana, with whom he had two sons : Symmachus and Boethius. He lead in all respects an exemplary career as proto-philologist, scientist, philosopher and statesman, successfully attaining all the higher echelons of public office : senator, consul ordinarius and patricius before being appointed magister officiorum under the Arian emperor Theodoric around the year 522. Then, due to a sudden change of fate (Gr.: ἡ εἱμαρμένη), he fell into disgrace with the emperor shortly after the year 522, was stripped of all his public offices, honours and dignities, and of all his material possessions which were confiscated. The earliest prosopographical and hagiographical sources on his life tell us that he was then imprisoned for two years, during which he “dictated” his ultimate work Consolatio Philosophiae, and shortly afterwards was unjustly put to death under torture, as was at the very same period his father-in-law Symmachus and the Pope John I between the years 524 and 526. The oldest of these sources is non other

than the Liber pontificalis (6th _{century: 523 – 526 • ¶ LV: Iohannes}

[1er_{], ed. L. Duchesne, Paris, 1886, t. I, p. 275). However, the most} complete and detailed of the earliest sources relating the circumstances of the arrest, incarceration and execution of Boethius is conserved in an anonymous chronicle known as Anonymus Valesianus, or Excerpta Valesiana II, dating between 526 and 550, which gives us the following account: “Tunc Albinus et Boethius ducti in custodiam ad baptisterium ecclesiae. Rex [i.e. Theodoricus] vero vocavit Eusebium, praefectum urbis, Ticinum et inaudito Boethio protulit in eum sententiam. Quem mox in agro Calventiano, ubi in custodia habebatur, misere fecit occidi. Qui accepta chorda in fronte diutissime tortus, ita ut oculi eius creparent, sic sub tormenta ad ultimum cum fuste occiditur”1_{. The popular cult and}

veneration of Boethius seems to have begun at an early date in Northern Italy in the geographical triangle of Pavia (Ticinum, later Papia)-Milano-Brescia; notwithstanding, the official feast of Seuerinus Boethius is attested in Italy as of the 16th century by the famous Italian mathematician and Abbot Francesco Maurolico (1494-1575) in his Martyrologium reverentis domini Francisci Maurolyci abbatis Messanensis, Venetiis, apud Junctas, mense septembri 1567, celebrated decimo kalendas nouembris, that is to say le 23rd of October; the eulogy here of Seuerinus Boethius is as follows: “Papiae Severini Boetii philosophi, ac theologi celeberrimi, a Theodorico tyranno proscripti, ac deinde in vinculis interfecti; cum prius Symmachum socerum similiter peremptum, amisisset.”. One must also add that the memory of Seuerinus Boethius is commemorated in the church of Santa Maria in Portico in Rome, whose construction dates back to the year 16322_.

It should also be pointed out that in spite of the early popular cult and veneration of Boethius in Pavia, the official feast was not authorized until the 15th of December 1883 by the Sacred

1 _{Cf. editio princeps by Henri de Valois, seigneur d’Orcé, Editio et annotatio}

excerpta autores ignoti de Constantio Chloro, Constantino Magno et aliis impp.,

Paris, 1636, Argentorati [Strasbourg], 1664; ed. Th. Mommsen, M.G.H.,

Auctores antiquissimi IX, Chronica minora, Berlin, 1892, p. 333 ¶ 85-87, 92; 1st

edition by J. Moreau, Leipzig (Teubner Verlag), 1961, p. 24-26, §85-92; 2nd

edition revised by V. Velkov, Leipzig (Teubner Verlag), 1968, p. 25, ¶ 87.

2

Dix mille saints. Dictionnaire hagiographique, by les Benedictine Monks of Ramsgate, Turnhout (Brepols), 1991, p. 95.

Congregation of Rites, and confirmed by Pope Leo XIII (1878 – 1903, alias Vincenzo Gioacchino Pecci)3_.

[¶ 2] The Boethii De institutione musica, a twin and

complementary treatise of his De institutione arithmetica libri duo (On the Fundamentals [and canonical Teachings of the Philosophy and Science] of Numbers and Proportions in two Books), is in fact, just as is the De institutione arithmetica, a personalized and up-to-date translation from the Greek. Indeed, Books I-IV of the Latin translation of the Boethii De musica are based on the now lost treatise by the ‘Middle-Platonist’ Νικόμαχος ὁ Γερασηνός,

Μουσικὴ εἰσαγωγή4, and the Book V is based on Book 1 of the still extant treatise of the ‘Middle-Platonist’ Κλαύδιος

Πτολεμαῖος, τὰ Ἁρμονικά, Α’ : α’ – Α’: ιϚ’5. It is useful to

know that Book V of the Boehtii De musica is unfinished, ending abruptly in Capitulum XVIIII of the XXX announced Capitula (cf. infra, [¶ 5]).

The De musica is mentioned and cited for the first time since Cassiodorus (*ca. 480 - †ca. 575) between the years 821 and 823 by the liturgist Amalarius of Metz, one of the last pupils of Alcuin of York at Saint-Martin de Tours, in his Liber Officialis, III, 11: 15-166. The brief citation in the Liber Officialis of

3 _{cf. M. Coens, Analecta Bollandiana, t. 78, 1960, p. 72, note 3. Nota bene:}

Concerning the prosopography and hagiography of Boethius, cf. Illo Humphrey, “Boèce: l’homme, la carrière, le destin, prosopographie, hagiographie, culte et vénération”, in Boèce, ([Boethius], Rome, ca. 480 – Pavie, 524): l’homme, le

philosophe, le scientifique, son oeuvre et son rayonnement, Acts of the

Colloquia Aquitana II – 2006, Paris (Éditions le Manuscrit), 2009, Tome I, Préliminaire VI, p. 49-112

4 _{Nikómachos o Gerasinós, †ca. a. D. 125, Mousikì eisagogí [Introduction to}

Music], C. Bower, “Boethius and Nicomachus”, Vivarium 16, 1978, p. 1-45.

5 _{Klaúdios Ptolemaîos, †ca. a. D. 168, tà Harmoniká [Harmonics], I, 1 - I,16;}

ed. Ingemar Düring, Göteborg, Die Harmonielehre des Claudios Ptolemaios, (Göteborgs Högskolas Arsskrift n° 36), Göteborg, 1930, reprint, Ancient

Philosophy n° 10, New York, 1980, p. 3-39; ed. J. L. Heiberg, Leipzig, 1903;

RISM [Greek]: ed. T. J. Mathiesen: n° 79, p. 204: Paris, BnF, Fonds grec 2450,

14th c., f. 1v-33v; Codex Venetus Marcianus gr. app. cl. VI n° 10, 12th c.

Amalarius7_{, seems to indicate that the De institutione musica was}

already well-known as of the year 800; then too, as of the year 821, it appears in the catalogue de Reginbertus (†846), librarian (armarius) of Reichenau Island (Augia insula)8. On this point, Michael Bernhard of the Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften in Munich, in revisiting the research of Bernhard Bischoff, puts forth the hypothesis, supported by 4 interesting arguments, that the Boethii De institutione musica may well have been a part of the hypothetical Bibliotheca Palatina in Aachen as early as the year 7809; this question, notwithstanding, remains open for the moment. Among the six oldest known copies of the De musica of the 9th _{century, all}

abundantly annotated and being part of the self same family of manuscripts, namely: Paris, BnF, Fond latins: 7200 [Laon – Soissons (?) via Fleury (?)] • 7297 [Fleury – Auxerre (?)] • 13908 [Corbie (?)] • 13955 [Corbie (?), Fulda (?)] • Orléans 293 (247) [Fleury (?)] • Vaticano, B.A.V., Reginensis latinus 1638 [Fleury (?)])10, the manuscript Paris, BnF, Fonds latin 720011, having been submitted to an exhaustive proto-philological study of its 112 stenographic tironian notes12, and its 104 notae sentenciarum, that

7

Boethii De institutione musica, I, 1, ed. G. Friedlein, 1867, p. 184: 7-9; ed. C. Bower, p. 5; ed. C. Meyer, p. 26.

8 _{Mittelalterliche Bibliothekskataloge Deutschlands und der Schweiz I : Die}

Diözesen Konstanz und Chur, ed. P. Lehmann, München, 1918, p. 258: 24.

9 _{Michael Bernhard, “Rezeption der Institutio Musica des Boethius im frühen}

Mittelalter”, in Boèce ou la chaîne des savoirs, ed. A. Galonnier, Louvain – Paris, (Peeters), 2003, p. 601-612

10 _{Marco Mostert, The Library of Fleury. A provisional list of Manuscripts,}

Hilversum, (Middeleeuwse Studies en Bronnen III: i.e. Medieval Studies and Sources n° 3), Hilversum (Verloren Publishers), 1989, p. 15-44, 51, 88, 161, 184, 214-215: n° BF 1096-BF 1098 = Paris, BnF, Fonds latin 7200.

11 _{Illo Humphrey, “Le De institutione musica libri quinque de Boèce dans le}

manuscrit B.n.F., latin 7200 (IXe _{s.)”: Étude codicologique, étude}

paléographique, édition des gloses, dans Livret 11: Positions des Thèses de

l’École Pratique des Hautes Études IVe _{Section à la Sorbonne (Section des}

Sciences historiques et philologiques), Paris, 1995-1996, p. 273-275.

12 _{Wilhelm Schmitz, Commentarium notarum tironianarum, 2 vol., 1893; Illo}

Humphrey, “La sténographie latine (notes dites ‘tironiennes’), état de la question (histoire et tradition manuscrite, transcription et édition critique, pratique)”, in Colloquia Aquitana I – 2005. Études médiévales: Patrimoine

is to say: cross-reference signs | annotation signs | omission signs13, which accompany its glosses, appears to be without the shadow of a doubt the oldest known copy of the Boethii De institutione musica libri quinque, dating between 820 and 850.

Thus, in the territory of Neustria (North-West Gaule between the Loire river on the South, and “Urbs aquensis, urbs regalis”, the city of Aachen, on the North), veritable cradle of the new branch of the Carolingian Tradition of Knowledge, one observes, between the years 782 and 850, a complete assimilation of the teachings of this treatise, as is fully attested by the anonymous and very scholarly commentaries of the earliest family of glosses. The archetype of the De musica manuscript tradition, probably from the 6th – 7th century, was written, seemingly, in uncial script. This hypothesis is based on the scribal error found rightly so in the codex Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Fonds latin 7200, folio 81 v°: line 19. This scribal error is due to a faulty reading of an uncial “M”, namely the mistranscription of the phoneme “EOMELIS” written in capitalis rustica script, which was corrected to “ENMELIS”: that is to say “emmelis” (Gr. ἐμμελής, –ής, –ές), meaning that which is suitable for melody, but is not itself a musical consonance; e.g. the whole tone of sesquioctava proportion 8 → 9, or in absolute proportion 1 → 1,125. This scribal confusion, between the uncial letters “M” and

“O” is a typical and well-known error often observed in

manuscripts copied from models in uncial script14. Apart from the codex Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Fonds latin 7200, this scribal error, until this day, has never been observed in any 47120, August 5 and 6, 2005, ed. Illo Humphrey, ISBN: 2-7481-4750-2, Paris (Éditions le Manuscrit), 2006, p. 99-152.

13 _{Isidori Hispalensis Etymologiarum I, XXI: De notis sentenciarum; José Lopez}

de Toro, Abreviatiuras hispanicas, 1957, Pl. XXXV; Illo Humphrey, Le De

institutione arithmetica et le De institutione musica de Boèce…, Doctoral

Dissertation in 5 Volumes, Université de Paris-X Nanterre (FCT n°: 9413058J), 2004, cf. Vol. 1, Ch. 25, p. 283-302, Vol. 3, p. 10-11, p. 88-91.

14 _{F. W. Shipley, “Certain Sources of Corruption in Latin Manuscripts. A Study}

based upon two Manuscripts of Livy: Codex Puteanus [Paris, BnF, Fonds latin 5730, 5th _{c.] and its copy Codex Reginensis 762 [Vaticano, B.A.V., Reginensis}

latinus 762, 9th c.]”, American Journal of Archaeology, Series 2, vol. VII, 1903, p. 1-35, 157-197, 405-428; see p.165.

other codex of the manuscript tradition of the Boethii De institutione musica libri quinque.

[¶ 3]This publication by Christian Meyer, as its title indicates, is a complete edition of the treatise Boethii De institutione musica libri quinque (Boethius On the Fundamentals [and canonical Teachings of the Philosophy and Science] of Music in five books) with the Latin text on the left and the French translation on the right. The Latin text is printed in fonts slightly larger than those of the French text, both however are clear and agreeable to read. The organization of the Book is as follows: Avant-Propos (p. 1-2), Introduction with notes (p. 3-16), Latin text and French translation of the five Books of the Boethii De institutione musica with notes (p. 17-347) and, at the end of the volume, a short bibliography entitled Références des ouvrages et travaux cité dans les notes (p. 349-351), the Table of Contents is found on the pagina ultima: p. 352; the publication contains neither Appendices, neither Glossaries, nor Index. The Latin text of the G. Friedlein critical edition of 1867 was adopted by the editor-translator, using its identical text lay-out and numbered lines, and indicating the Friedlein pagination in the fore-edge margin. As for the French translation, the Friedlein pagination is indicated in the body of the text in brackets, the lines of the French text are unnumbered. The numerous descriptiones (diagrams) of the De musica, very characteristic in the manuscript tradition of most scientific-philosophical treatises (Greek – Latin – Hebrew – Arabic), are reproduced with clarity and care, as well as the musical notations attributed to Alýpios in the three genres : diatonic, chromatic, enharmonic (tres genera: diatonum • chromaticum • enharmonium); cf. De musica Books IIII, 3, et IIII, 16), according to the Great unchangeable System (τὸ ἀμεττττάβολον Σύστημα). The harmonious dimensions of the Book, 210 mm x 140 mm (equivalent to the proportions of the musical interval of a perfect fifth, whose absolute proportion is of course 1 → 1,5), give it great elegance and furnish the reader with a well-balanced and agreeable format easy to hold in the hand. These dimensions are very close to the classical European format called “A5”, that is to say 210 mm x 148,5 mm, whose absolute proportion is 1 →

1,414141414141414141414141414, in other words very close to the absolute proportion of the square root of 2 (that is to say 1 → 1,41412135623730950488016887242096980785696718753769,

cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square_root_of_2), well-known to

students of mathematics. In terms of musical intervals, le format “A5”, as one well observes, is slightly inferior to the absolute proportion of the perfect fifth (1 → 1,5). The Book is twenty millimetres thick and weighs 500 grams.

[¶ 4] Avant propos: p. 1-2

In the Avant propos, the editor-translator gives us a brief proto-philological and historical survey on the Boethii De institutione musica libri quinque, indicating the influence of the treatise during the period between the 9th century and the 15th century (more than 150 extant manuscripts), the development of the manuscript tradition, also indicating the first Incunabula printed edition (J. de Forlivo et Gregorium Fratres, Venezia, 1491-1492), then indicates the edition of Henricus Petrus, prefaced by Heinrich Loritz (b. k. a. Glarean), Basel, 1546, and finally the critical edition by Godofredus Friedlein, Leipzig (Teubner Verlag), 1867. Next, he passes in review the two vernacular translations: first, the German translation by Oscar Paul, Leipzig, 1872, and secondly the Anglo-American translation by Calvin M. Bower, Yale University Press, 1989. Lastly, he informs us that the present publication was conceived and completed following his participation in the research, editing and translating of the Tractatus de musica by Jerome of Moravia, in collaboration with Esther Lachapelle (Bruxelles), Guy Lobrichon (Avignon-Vaucluse), and Marcel Pérès (Royaumont) between 1990 and 1995.

[¶ 5] Introduction: p. 3 – 16

The Introduction of the Book is divided into ten distinct sections, five of which are dedicated to the five Books of the treatise De institutione musica libri quinque. The ten sections are as follows : [1] Introduction, [2] Le Contenu, [3] Premier Livre, [4] Deuxième Livre, [5] Troisième Livre, [6] Quatrième Livre, [7] Cinquième Livre, [8] Un texte inachevé ? [9] Tradition manuscrite et réception du texte, [10] Texte et traduction. The editor-translator

carefully exposes here the contents of the text, explains its complexity, its manuscript tradition, its outreach, indicating Book by Book the sources (certain of which are given by Boethius himself, and others left unmentioned), issued out of the scientific-philosophical Tradition of Knowledge:

• BOOK I (34 chapters): Terpander, Pythagoras, Philolaos,

Plato,[Aristotle],[Nicomachus], etc.;

• BOOK II (31 chapters): Pythagoras, Eubulides, Hippasos,

[Nicomachus], Boethius Arithmetica;

• BOOK III (16 chapters): [Pythagoras], Philolaos, Archytas,

Aristoxène, [Nicomachus];

• BOOK IIII (18 chapters): [Euclid], [Nicomachus],

[Gaudentios • Mutianus (?)];

• BOOK V (30 chapters announced, 19 written): Pythagore,

Archytas, Aristoxène, Ptolemy.

The editor-translator reminds us, as indicated above in [¶ 2], that Book V is based entirely on BOOK I of the treatise on Harmonics by Ptolemaîos, then that this final and last BOOK of the De musica was left unfinished. In effect, as indicated above in [¶ 2], in the Table of Contents of BOOK V, Boethius announces thirty chapters, but in realty there are only nineteen chapters, and indeed CHAPTER XVIIII ends abruptly in the middle of a sentence: “In non spissis

vero ut in diatonicis generibus nusquam una…”.

[¶ 6] In the organizational planning of this tri-disciplinary treatise, one observes a very elaborate use of cross-references intra libros which Boethius himself initiated. These cross-references are designed to guide the reader in his or her discovery of the work, in order to better facilitate his or her understanding. Boethius, indeed fully conscious of the complexity of his treatise, exposes certain themes in Book I that are then explained and re-examined in the four subsequent Books (e.g.: De musica I, 6 → V, 7; I, 11 → IIII, 18; I, 19 → II, 31). Then too, he sends the reader from one Book to another, in order to indicate that the topic in question will be explained in more detail in a further Book. However, it must be mentioned that in a certain number of cases, Boethius having given the cross-references fails to give the corresponding explanations, e.g.: De musica I,2: “de quibus posterius studiosius disputandum

est.” • I,34: “de quibus posterius explicandum est.” • II, 22: “ Monstrabitur enim…” • V,12: “…posterius dicendis proportionibus”15. It is also interesting to note that Boethius in his De institutione musica gives cross-references sending the reader to his De institutione arithmetica, in order to clarify a topic, or simply to indicate that the subject at hand had already been fully discussed in his De arithmetica (e.g.: De musica I, 4 → De arithmetica I,21 to I,32; De musica II,7 • II,8 • II,9 → De arithmetica I,32, et I,29 • II,2 • I,14 to I,16, etc.). Finally, one must know that Boethius in his De arithmetica, never once alludes to his De musica, this may be explained by the simple fact that the De arithmetica was written before the De musica.

¶ [7]In several of the oldest manuscripts containing the Boethii De musica, certain cross-references of Boethius are re-given in the glosses, and there where Boethius does not give the corresponding reference, the author of the glosses in question indicates precisely the corresponding Book, cf. Boethii De musica, I, 6 (Glosses): “in Nono QUINTI LIBRI Capitulo•”, Paris, BnF, Fonds latin 7200 [Laon – Soissons via Fleury ?], f. 8r°: line 4 (gl.: right margin), Paris, BnF, Fonds latin 13908 [Corbie ?], f. 59v°: line 24 (gl. : upper margin), cf. Boethii De musica I, 19 (Glosses): “in figura quae est in fine SECUNDI LIBRI”, Paris, BnF, Fonds latin 7200 [Soissons via Fleury ?], f. 13r°: line 14-15 (gl.: right margin), Paris, Bibliothèque nationale de France, Fonds latin 13908 [Corbie ?], f. 65r°: line 22 (gl.: right margin)16. The cross-references intra libros indicated by Boethius in his De musica, are systematically signalled by the edition of Christian Meyer in the foot-notes of the French translation.

[¶ 8]Thus, one finds in the text of the De musica twenty different cross-references intra libros, and six cross-references between glosses and the Boethian text. These cross-references correspond

15 _{András Kárpáti, “Translation or Compilation ? Contributions to the analysis of}

sources of Boethius’ De institutione musica”, Studia Musicologica Academiae

Scientiarum Hungaricae 29, 1987, p. 8-10.

16 _{M. Bernhard et C. M. Bower, Glossa maior in institutionem musicam Boethii,}

on the one hand to the internal pedagogy of the De musica, and on the other hand to the natural interdependence of the two treatises De arithmetica et De musica one to the other. This interdependence, made evident by the cross-references intra libros, by citations, barrowings and paraphrases, all being typical Boethian didactical methods, are illustrated here in the following descriptio:

Boethii De institutione arithmetica libri duo:

Boethii De institutione musica libri quinque:

Observations :

[¶ 9] The Boethii De institutione musica libri quinque is indeed a complex treatise, of both scientific and philosophical nature. Given the complexity of this tri-disciplinary treatise, it would have been useful, for practical reasons, to see in this publication a didactical Appendix explaining in detail the implications of certain fundamental concepts such as : the principle of the cognitive process (cognitio [ἡ γνώμη, –ης], p. 20, BOOK I,1), the principle of l’ethos of the modes [τὸ τῶν τρόπων ἦθος] in relationship to cognitive and behavioural therapy (p. 28-30, BOOK I,1), the principle of vocal sounds (phthongos [ὁ ϕθόγγος, –ου • ϕθέγγεσθαι •], p. 44, BOOK I,8) , the principle of the musical consonances (• VI • VIII • VIIII • XII • p. 46-50, BOOK I,10,11), the fundamental principle of the Regime of the Octave (continua proportio superparticularis [ἡ σύνεχις ἐπιμόριος ἀναλογία], p. 110-116, BOOK II,8), the role and functions of the 12 divisions of the As17_{, the Greek musical notations attributed to Ἀλύπιος ὁ}

17 _{As, assis or libra is a Roman duodecimal unity designed to express fractions,}

percentages, weights, measures, monetary values, etc., cf. Boethii De

institutione musica III,2, 3, 4, 13; Friedlein, p. 273-275, 292; Bower, p. 91- 94,

108; Meyer, p. 176, 178, 180, 208; Illo Humphrey, ”Les douze divisions de l’As, leur emploi chez Calcidius et chez Boèce“, in Colloquia Aquitana II – 2006,

Μουσικός: “τὸ ἀμετάβολον Σύστημα” (Alýpios o Mousikós: “Greater Perfect System”), p. 234-240, p. 296-299, BOOK IIII,3,16), as well as the Latin alphabetical two-octave musical notations called “bis diapason” (p. 288-294, BOOK IIII,14, et p. 304, BOOK IIII,17), the phenomenon of the interval suitable for melody, but itself not being considered a musical consonance (• VIII • VIIII • emmelis [ἐμμελής, –ής, –ές], p. 44, BOOK I,8 et p. 330-331, BOOK V,6; V,11; V,12); then too, a glossary of technical terms and an Index rerum, verborum et nominum would have been much appreciated. Such Appendices, put directly at the disposal of the reader, would make easier the day-to-day utilisation and the assimilation of this very excellent research and pedagogical tool; this being so, in spite of the point of view expressed by the editor himself (p. 16 of the Introduction). This being said, I am sure that the editor-translator, if one requests it graciously of him, will consider the suggestion to put at the disposal of the research community a small manual containing the said Appendices, in the form and spirit of the of ancient libellus.

Epilogue:

[¶ 10] In conclusion, this remarkable scholarly work offered to us by Christian Meyer, enhanced by the very elegant Pythagorean format of Brepols, has already earned a place of honour in the most recent scientific-philosophical bibliography on Boethius. Indeed, this very timely French translation of the Boethii De institutione musica libri quinque is in all respects an excellent and useful tool which will render many good services on the long term ; even to those who only stand and wait. Thus, as one may well observe, the present work is the fruit of three decades of mature interdisciplinary and integrated research, and is a culminating point in the career of this admirable French and European scholar, indeed one of the finest mediæval Musicologists of the present day. • Explicit • Illo Humphrey •

Illo Humphrey, Ph. D. | HDR | Mediævalist | Musicologist | Proto-Philologist • _{https://u-bordeaux3.academia.edu/IlloHumphrey/Papers} • • https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Illo_Humphrey/contributions • • http://www.colloquiaaquitana.com/?page_id=754 • • illo.humphrey@free.fr • illohumphrey01@free.fr • •

Associate Researcher | EA 4593 CLARE – LaPRIL | Université Bordeaux Montaigne | 33607 Pessac | France Director-Founder of the Colloquia Aquitana

http://www.colloquiaaquitana.com/?page_id=4

Director-Founder of La B.I.R.E.

(Bibliothèque Interdisciplinaire de Recherche Européenne)

http://www.colloquiaaquitana.com/?page_id=3

•

Member of the International Boethius Society Member of the Medieval Academy of America

Member of Musicologie médiévale

scripsi et subscrispi.

Mussiaco-Cramayelo, Francia – 77550: Sequana-et-Matrona

Die martis decimo kalendas decembris, anno Domini B bis millesimo quinto

Festum sanctæ Cæciliæ (*Roma, ca. 200 – † Roma, ca. 230), ipsa musicae, musicarum musicorumque sancta Patrona est.

Nota bene :

This review-essay a modified English version of the original French version, which appeared in the issue of the Carmina Philosophiae | Volume 14, 2005, p. 167-176

© International Boethius Society (USA) | ISSN#1075-4407 • http://www.mtsu.edu/~english2/Journals/boethius/ •