The Consolation of Philosophy

he thought ought to be reconciled with each other, while simultaneously opposing the later Platonists. Similarly, F. Klingner,¹) unaware of Rand’s commentary, treated many passages from various writers²) (though neglecting Plutarch) and explained that Boethius had recalled and adapted questions investigated by the doctors of the church to arguments drawn from ancient philosophy.³) Verner Jaeger (Aristoteles, Berol. 1923) argues well regarding the Protrepticus and passages from works written by Aristotle in his later years that seem to point back to the Protrepticus; on page 65, note 1, he warns that Boethius did not use the Hortensius.

Therefore, using these commentaries, I have gathered the words of Aristotle, Augustine, Cicero, Epicurus, Eusebius, Galen, and the Protreptics of Iamblichus, as well as Plato, Plotinus, Proclus,⁴) and others, which seem either to have been in Boethius’s mind or to be of some importance for recognizing a common source.⁵) Similar passages
Klingner 88, 4: Since it is now established that he was a Christian and wrote theological works, there is no need to take refuge in the Stoics. Bonnaud (Speculum IV 201, 4) notes that the Neoplatonists followed the moral doctrine of the Stoics but rejected their physics.