Having a rhythm around my reading helps me choose what books I’m going to read next from my reading list. Recently, that’s been largely built around my ongoing Wheel of Time reread: read a Wheel of Time book, then select two from philosophy, historical, history, nonfiction, or biography, read the next Bible book, and then return to the next Wheel of Time installment. After my incidental emphasis on Rome with On Agriculture and Plutarch’s biography of Cato, I wanted to choose a piece of philosophy from a different time period, which led me to The Consolation of Philosophy.
As usual, this book was on my reading list for quite some time. Its history and implicit “framing story” might be more interesting than its contents. Boethius, a prosperous and influential intellectual who spent most of his life translating and preserving the works of the great Greek philosophers – we owe him no small thanks for the survival of Plato’s, Aristotle’s, and others’ works to the present day – runs afoul of political changes and winds up imprisoned. The Consolation of Philosophy, probably his most famous original work, begins with him despairing of his altered fortunes, when the embodiment of philosophy appears to him in his cell, and undertakes to convince him all the reasons he should not be so negative about his changed circumstances.
Although it’s often described as being in the vein of one of Plato’s dialogues, the conversation between book-Boethius and Lady Philosophy reads like a cross between the style of Plato and the style of Dante. Plato’s dialogues are less blatantly allegorical, for all they may or may not involve real people and revolve around heady ideas. Where the ancient Greek dialogues read more like a conversation, an actual dialogue, The Consolation of Philosophy reads more like a lecture with the framework of Boethius’ circumstances and questions providing some structure and direction for Lady Philosophy’s teachings.
This does not make Boethius’ inspiration any less obvious. Entire sections of The Consolation of Philosophy are paraphrased or summarized directly from Plato’s works. Others read like excerpts from Seneca’s, or Aristotle’s. This is not necessarily a bad thing, and the writing is well done, but Boethius does not make much original contribution to the matters he considers. Early books are largely a restatement of principles of stoicism, and later books in the Consolation are restatements of Plato. Clearly, Boethius was intimately familiar with his source material…but I’ve read the source material, too, and find it generally clearer and better reasoned. I would not go quite so far as to accuse Boethius of merely being a chauffeur of knowledge, but it’s close.
The Consolation of Philosophy is a famous work, but having read it, I wonder how much that fame derives from its association, more than from its own merits. Beyond his translation efforts, Boethius was a theologian, and a key influence in rendering Greek philosophy and thought palatable to a Christian audience. His other famous, independent work, Theological Tractates, reflects this religious preoccupation (my copy of The Consolation of Philosophy included the Tractates, as well, so perhaps I will read those in the future). Were I not already familiar with (most of) the source material, I would surely have appreciated The Consolation of Philosophy far more…but, for most people, I would recommend returning to those primary sources over lingering on The Consolation of Philosophy.
IGC Publishing 