See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/299392243

• Illo Humphrey | Ph. D.-HDR • « Boethii De institutione musica libri quinque:

auctor, opus, interpres » | Book Review ~ Essay: Boèce. Traité de la Musique.
Introduction, traductio...

Article · September 2005

CITATIONS READS

0 333

1 author:

Illo Humphrey
Université Bordeaux Montaigne
39 PUBLICATIONS   1 CITATION   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Colloquia Aquitana V – 3, 4, 5 août 2018 | Sainte-Foy des Vignes | 24100 Bergerac | France : • Notes tironiennes. Histoire – Manuscrits – Paléographie : bassin
méditerranéenne | Renaissance carolingienne • View project

• Colloquia Aquitana VI, 2, 3, 4-VIII-2019 - Philosophy and Theology in Carolingian and Post-Carolingian manuscript Illuminations | Bergerac, France • View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Illo Humphrey on 24 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 [Couverture]
CARMINA PHILOSOPHIAE (© IBS) | Volume 14, 2005, p. 167-176

• Review ~ Essay •
ILLO HUMPHREY, PH. 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 •
• https://u-bordeaux3.academia.edu/IlloHumphrey/Papers •
 • Illo Humphrey | REVIEW~ESSAY | English Version • 167

Boethii De institutione musica libri quinque:

auctor, opus, interpres
ILLO HUMPHREY, PH. D. | HDR
Mediævalist | Musicologist | Proto-Philologist
(Université Paris X – Nanterre | 2004 | 2014)

[¶ 0] T he very timely publication of this scholarly work of

Christian Meyer 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
168 • Carmina Philosophiae | Volume 14, 2005 •
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
 • Illo Humphrey | REVIEW~ESSAY | English Version • 169
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.
170 • Carmina Philosophiae | Volume 14, 2005 •
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.
6
I. M. Hanssens (ed.), Vatican, 1948, et 1967, Studi e Testi n° 139, p. 296-297.
 • Illo Humphrey | REVIEW~ESSAY | English Version • 171
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
matériel et immatériel, Acts of Symposium held in Aquitania, Duras, France –
172 • Carmina Philosophiae | Volume 14, 2005 •
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.
 • Illo Humphrey | REVIEW~ESSAY | English Version • 173
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 ἀμεττάβολον 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 →
174 • Carmina Philosophiae | Volume 14, 2005 •
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
 • Illo Humphrey | REVIEW~ESSAY | English Version • 175
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
176 • Carmina Philosophiae | Volume 14, 2005 •
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,
München, 1993, Band I, p. LXXIII-LXXV, p. 159, 253.
 • Illo Humphrey | REVIEW~ESSAY | English Version • 177
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,
Boèce…, cf. supra, note 3, Paris, 2009, Tome II, Chapter 12: pages 261-274.
178 • Carmina Philosophiae | Volume 14, 2005 •
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 •
Musée Conservatoire du Parchemin et de l'Enluminure de Duras | 47120 France
 • Illo Humphrey | REVIEW~ESSAY | English Version • 179
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/ •
• http://www.d.umn.edu/~palm0224/boethius/carmina_philosophiae/index.html •

View publication stats