“Marcus Aurelius
By William O. Stephens
Reaktion, 232 pages, $22.50
Despite a lustrous popular image burnished by the 2000 film "Gladiator," Marcus Aurelius is, to scholars, a controversial figure. Some see his "Meditations," his collection of precepts for self-improvement by way of Stoic philosophy, as a mirror of the values he brought to his two decades as Rome's emperor (A.D. 161-80). Others have focused attention on the distance between these contemplative writings and the facts of Marcus' political career. "The real Marcus Aurelius seems to be basically a Roman rather than a Stoic," one historian wrote in 1969.
In "Marcus Aurelius: Philosopher-King," William O. Stephens, an emeritus professor of philosophy at Creighton University, makes clear which side of the Marcus divide he stands on. In his recounting of the emperor's life, he supports the image of Marcus as a beleaguered sage who maintained his moral center amid troubled times. The portrait is appealing, but the author too often relies on ancient writers who were themselves captivated by the ideal of a wise man in power. He makes liberal use of a biased Roman biography that likewise reveals its point of view in its title: "The Life of Marcus Antoninus, Philosopher."
Marcus had a studious, sober nature that showed itself even in youth and young adulthood. Born Marcus Annius Verus in A.D. 121, he so impressed a family friend, the emperor Hadrian, that his cognomen Verus, meaning "true," was amplified to Verissimus, "truest." In the year 138, as Hadrian grew increasingly ill, he paid Marcus even greater honor by engineering a more consequential name change. Childless and conscious that his imperial predecessors had selected their successors by means of adoption, Hadrian adopted a man in his 50s, who became Antoninus, and instructed that man to adopt, in turn, the 16-year-old Marcus, along with another child, Lucius Ceionius Commodus. Two generations of rule were secured in a single stroke.
Marcus thus matured in the palace with Lucius as his adoptive brother and Antoninus, an inspiring model (he soon received the epithet Pius), showing him how to rule. Marcus admired his surrogate father and wrote movingly about him in the "Meditations": Antoninus, Marcus wrote, "made me realize that one can live in a palace without needing bodyguards, flashy clothes, linkmen, statues, and all such pomp." Mr. Stephens comments in a way that exalts the passage's author: "Given this statement, it seems implausible that . . . Marcus bowed to trumpery." But surely the passage attests to attitude, not practice, for could Marcus have really eschewed bodyguards?
When Antoninus died in 161, Marcus and Lucius became the Roman empire's first-ever co-rulers. The dissolute, debauched Lucius might have proved quite a challenge for Marcus in the long run, but illness carried him off after eight years in power. The Antonine Plague, perhaps a form of smallpox, had begun to ravage the empire, as it would for more than a decade. Millions of lives were lost to the pathogen, including most of the 14 children born to Marcus and his wife, Faustina. In the end five daughters survived but only one son, to whom Marcus had given a now-infamous name: Commodus.
For eight decades, no Roman emperor had a legitimate son to make heir, and the new circumstance forced a difficult choice on Marcus. Selective adoption had served the empire extremely well, producing a run of sound rulers that has come to be known as the Five Good Emperors. But for Marcus to follow this precedent would mean disinheriting his child. He chose to favor biology over meritocracy and anointed Commodus as his heir when the boy was only 5 years old. That decision would have grave consequences.
The empire was beset in these decades by Germans as well as germs. Under pressure from neighbors, Germanic and Sarmatian tribes began crossing the Danube, one of Rome's borders, in the 160s and continuing at intervals throughout the 170s. Marcus went north to oppose what were then seen as invasions but, in today's terms, would be better described as waves of migration. The Marcomannic Wars (166-80), named after the largest and most troublesome of these tribes, would keep Marcus in armed camps for most of his reign. A bas-relief column in Rome, completed soon after his death and largely intact today, glorifies his victories over shaggy-haired, bearded warriors, some of whom are shown having their heads lopped off.
Mr. Stephens does a superb job of following these complex campaigns, giving full scope to Marcus' soldierly side. "Although Marcus was acknowledged as a philosopher in his own day, his role in military affairs was more important to contemporaries," the author notes. He also tackles the question of whether that role was at odds with the Stoic ideals that Marcus set down in the intervals between battles in the notes that became the "Meditations."
Though Stoics believed themselves part of a cosmopolis -- a polity of all humankind -- it was nonetheless Marcus' duty to stop those with "simpler minds" from harming that community, writes Mr. Stephens.
Marcus had suffered from various ailments since childhood, and life in the north made these worse. The issue of succession became more urgent. Commodus, now a teenager, had shown he had none of his father's nature; he so preferred athletics to statecraft that some believed he'd been sired by a gladiator. Yet Marcus made Commodus co-emperor in 177. When Marcus died three years later and Commodus took the throne, the era of the Good Emperors came to a disastrous end. Mr. Stephens does his best to excuse this failure of judgment, arguing that Commodus was likely to start a civil war if he were pushed aside. But one might easily think that Marcus, despite his self-admonition in the "Meditations" not to become "Caesarified," wanted to keep royal power in the family.
Mr. Stephens writes with vigor and verve, and he refrains from flaunting the expertise he clearly possesses. It's to his credit that in this book he faces head-on the controversies surrounding Marcus' reign. But one senses his eagerness to resolve all questions in Marcus' favor and preserve the luster of the philosopher-king.
---
Mr. Romm, professor of classics at Bard College, is the author of "Plato and the Tyrant: The Fall of Greece's Greatest Dynasty and the Making of a Philosophic Masterpiece."” [1]
Commodus was the biological son and successor of the philosopher-emperor Marcus Aurelius, becoming co-emperor in 177 and sole emperor in 180 CE, but his reign marked a sharp decline from his father's principled rule, characterized by cruelty, megalomania (identifying with Hercules), lavish spectacles, political instability, and eventual assassination in 192 CE, ending the Pax Romana. Marcus Aurelius groomed Commodus for leadership, but his son proved to be the antithesis of Stoic ideals, preferring personal indulgence and violence over duty, leading to widespread discontent.
Key Aspects of Commodus's Reign:
Succession:
Commodus was the first son to directly succeed his father as emperor in a long time, breaking the tradition of adoptive succession, a decision some historians view as a major failing of Marcus Aurelius.
Character:
He was known for his cruelty, narcissism, and a fascination with gladiatorial combat, often participating in the arena himself, an act seen as debasing for an emperor.
Governance:
He neglected state affairs, delegating to corrupt officials, and relied on lavish spending and purges to maintain power, alienating the Senate and army.
"Anti-Stoic":
Commodus embodied everything his father preached against in his Meditations: laziness, lust, vengefulness, and a lack of duty.
End of an Era:
His tyrannical rule and extravagant lifestyle ushered in a period of instability, traditionally seen as the end of the Pax Romana (Roman Peace).
Death:
After a series of conspiracies, he was ultimately assassinated on December 31, 192 CE, poisoned and then strangled by a wrestler.
Why Marcus Aurelius Chose Him:
Despite recognizing his son's flaws, Marcus Aurelius felt he had little choice; making anyone else emperor might have led to Commodus's death as a rival, and dynastic succession was expected, writes History.com and Britannica.
1. The Mind And the Sword. Romm, James. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 12 Jan 2026: A15.
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą