The Politics of Chaucer's Boece
By focusing on the historicity and politics of translation, I discuss in this paper the political motive and functions of The Boece, Chaucer's translation from Boethius's De Consolatione Philosophiae. After examining the political implications of Boethius's work, I argue that the Latin source provides an insight into the nature of royal power, especially its perversion into tyranny. From the investigation of the history and politics in the early 1380s when the young Richard began to establish his sovereignty firmly, I suggest an educational motive of Chaucer's Boece for the king: the translation might have been aimed at giving the young king lessons about what constitutes a tyrant, thus warning him of the vices and dangers of aggregating excessive governing power. I also suggest that, during the period from the mid-1380s to 1399 when the king became more and more tyrannical, The Boece may have had potential resonance with the concerns of the king's opponents, his magnates, about the misuse of royal power. I conclude with the observation that, contrary to Chaucer's expectations of diverting the king from the dangerous road of excessive power, his Boece could have served as one of the tools of attack for the magnates to confront, and eventually depose, Richard Ⅱ.
Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius
Anicius Manlius Severinus Boethius (born: circa 475–7 C.E., died: 526? C.E.) has long been recognized as one of the most important intermediaries between ancient philosophy and the Latin Middle Ages and, through his Consolation of Philosophy, as a talented literary writer, with a gift for making philosophical ideas dramatic and accessible to a wider public. He had previously translated Aristotle’s logical works into Latin, written commentaries on them as well as logical textbooks, and used his logical training to contribute to the theological discussions of the time. All these writings, which would be enormously influential in the Middle Ages, drew extensively on the thinking of Greek Neoplatonists such as Porphyry and Iamblichus. Recent work has also tried to identify and evaluate Boethius’s own contribution, as an independent thinker, though one working within a tradition which put little obvious weight on philosophical originality. Both aspects of Boethius will be considered in the sections which follow. 1. Life and Works 2. The Logical Project and the Logical Commentaries 3. The Logical Text-Books 4. The Theological Treatises 5. The Consolation of Philosophy: The Argument of Books I–V.2 6. Divine Prescience, Contingency and Eternity 7. Interpreting the Consolation 8. Boethius’s Influence and Importance Bibliography Primary Texts in Latin Selected English (and other) Translations of Primary Texts Selected Secondary Works Academic Tools Other Internet Resources Related Entries
The Dilemma of Freedom and Foreknowledge
This book is an informed, clear, and highly illuminating discussion of issues surrounding arguments for and against the compatibility of human freedom of action with comprehensive divine foreknowledge. Zagzebski provides a balanced treatment of the major approaches to resolving the problem (those of Boethius/Aquinas, Ockham, and Molina), offering brief but fairly careful expositions of the original medieval formulations as well as examining important contributions to the (rapidly developing) contemporary discussion. While arguing that there are shortcomings in each of these solutions as formulated to date, Zagzebski puts forth three new solutions, one an extension of the Boethian strategy, and the other two drawing upon recent attacks on the Principle of Alternative Possibilities and certain Transfer of Necessity principles. (Thus, despite her fascina-tion with, and respect for the depth of, the foreknowledge dilemma, Zagzebski optimistically holds that the traditional theist has rather an em-barrassment of riches for resolving it.) The thoroughness and clarity of the work could make it workable as the primary text even in an (upper-level) undergraduate course in which the students have some philosophical so-phistication. At the same time, its originality and argumentative depth makes it indispensable for the philosopher currently thinking about the topic. There is much to commend, then, in this excellent study. I will focus my critical comments on the components of Zagzeb-ski's discussion I found to most interesting. The of these is her the Boethian move of ascribing an (atemporal) eternal mode of existence God, coherent and indepen-dent motivation, does not provide a full the problem (60 ff.). The the temporalist