Intimacy, Interdependence, and Interiority in the Old English Prose Boethius
This article explores voice in the prose (B Text) version of the Old English Boethius. It argues that the Old English Boethius transforms the Socratic dialogue of its main Latin source, Boethius’s De consolatione philosophiae, into an interdependent dialogue focused on the inner life. This transformation of the Old English Boethius fits into two categories: first, the initial split of voices that refocuses the first two-thirds of the text on Boethius’s mod; and second, the expansion of direct address to the audience by Wisdom. The Old English Boethius can, therefore, be read as a distinctly Anglo-Saxon philosophical pursuit, where the path to God is through the development of interdependent relationships.
KeywordsBoethius Old English prose Interiority Medieval philosophy Anglo-Saxon
I would like to thank Malcolm Godden, Susan Irvine, Francis Leneghan, Winfried Rudolf, Daniel Thomas, Hannah Bailey, Stefany Wragg, and Helen Appleton for their helpful comments in the development of this paper.
- Boethius, A. M. S. (1984). Philosophiae consolatio (L. Bieler, Ed.). Turnholt: Brepols.Google Scholar
- Boethius, A. M. S. (1999; repr. 2008). The Consolation of Philosophy (P. G. Walsh, Ed. & Trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Boethius, A. M. S. (2000). De consolatione philosophiae; Opuscula theologica (C. Moreschini, Ed.). Munich: K. G. Saur.Google Scholar
- Crawford, S. (1999). Childhood in Anglo-Saxon England. Stroud: Sutton.Google Scholar
- Dictionary of Old English Web Corpus. Dictionary of Old English Project, University of Toronto. Compiled by Antonette diPaolo Healey with John Price Wilkin and Xin Xiang. http://tapor.library.utoronto.ca/doecorpus/. Accessed 15 February 2018.
- Discenza, N. G. (2005). The King’s English: Strategies of translation in the Old English Boethius. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
- Discenza, N. G. (2015). The Old English Boethius. In N. G. Discenza & P. E. Szarmach (Eds.), A companion to Alfred the Great. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
- Godden, M. (1985). Anglo-Saxons on the mind. In M. Lapidge & H. Gneuss (Eds.), Learning and literature in Anglo-Saxon England: Studies presented to Peter Clemoes on the occasion of his sixty-fifth birthday (pp. 271–298). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Godden, M. (2003). The player king: Identification and self-representation in King Alfred’s writings. In T. Reuter (Ed.), Alfred the Great: Papers from the eleventh-centenary conferences (pp. 137–150). Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
- Godden, M., & Irvine, S. (2009). The Old English Boethius: An edition of the Old English versions of Boethius’s De consolatione philosophiae (M. Godden & S. Irvine, Trans.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Lenz, K. (2012). Ræd and frofer: Christian poetics in the Old English froferboc meters. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
- Lerer, S. (1985; repr. 2014). Boethius and dialogue: Literary method in the Consolation of Philosophy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Lockett, L. (2011). Anglo-Saxon psychologies in the vernacular and Latin traditions. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
- Low, S.-A. (2001). Approaches to the Old English vocabulary for ‘mind’. Studia Neophilologica, 73, 11–22.Google Scholar
- Payne, A. F. (1968). King Alfred and Boethius: An analysis of the Old English version of the Consolation of Philosophy. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
- Šileikytė, R. (2004). In search of the inner mind: Old English gescead and other lexemes for human cognition in King Alfred’s Boethius. Kalbotyra, 54, 94–102.Google Scholar
- Thomas, R. (1988). The binding force of friendship in King Alfred’s Consolation and Soliloquies. Ball State University Forum, 29, 5–20.Google Scholar
- Waterhouse, R. (1986). Tone in Alfred’s version of Augustine’s Soliloquies. In Paul E. Szarmach (Ed.), Studies in earlier Old English prose: Sixteen original contributions (pp. 47–85). Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar