[Illustration]
The Thoughts of the Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus
LONG’S TRANSLATION
EDITED BY EDWIN GINN
Contents
PREFACE
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
THE THOUGHTS
PHILOSOPHY OF MARCUS AURELIUS ANTONINUS
GENERAL INDEX
[TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE: All the footnotes have been moved to the end of
the text. I have also relabeled the book headings; [I., II., … XI.] has
been changed to [BOOK I., BOOK II., … BOOK XI.] at the start of each
Section. I have also added a “1.” before the first “thought” in each
BOOK.]
PREFACE.
Perhaps some may question the wisdom of putting out the Thoughts of
Marcus Aurelius Antoninus to be used as a Reader by children in the
schools. It may appear to them better suited to the mature mind. The
principle, however, that has governed us in selecting reading for the
young has been to secure the best that we could find in all ages for
grown-up people. The milk and water diet provided for “my dear
children” is not especially complimentary to them. They like to be
treated like little men and women, capable of appreciating a good
thing. One finds in this royal philosopher a rare generosity, sweetness
and humility, qualities alike suited to all ages.
Adopting the philosopher’s robe at twelve, he remains a student all his
life. The precepts that he would give for the government of others, he
has practised upon himself. In his time, as in ours, there were good
physicians for the mind and body, who could make wise prescriptions for
the government of their neighbors, but were unable to apply them to
themselves. The faults of our fellows are so numerous and so easy to
cure that one is readily tempted to become the physician, while our own
faults are so few and so unimportant that it is hardly worth while to
give any attention to them. Hence we have a multitude of physicians for
humanity in general, and a scarcity of individual healers.
It was the doctrine of Marcus Aurelius that most of the ills of life
come to us from our own imagination, that it was not in the power of
others seriously to interfere with the calm, temperate life of an
individual, and that when a fellow being did anything to us that seemed
unjust he was acting in ignorance, and that instead of stirring up
anger within us it should stir our pity for him. Oftentimes by careful
self-examination we should find that the fault was more our own than
that of our fellow, and our sufferings were rather from our own
opinions than from anything real. The circle of man’s knowledge is very
limited, and the largest circles do not wholly include the smallest.
They are intersecting and the segment common to any two is very small.
Whatever lies outside this space does not exist for both. Hence arise
innumerable contests. The man having the largest intelligence ought to
be very generous to the other. Being thankful that he has been blessed
in so many ways, he should do all in his power to enlighten his less
favored fellow, rather than be angry with him on account of his
misfortune. Is he not sufficiently punished in being denied the light?
Assisting his uncle in the government of the great Roman Empire at
seventeen, it was his aim constantly to restrain the power of the
strong and to assist the weak. He studied the laws of his country, not
for wisdom alone, but that he might make them more beneficial to his
people. All his life he tried to bring his fellows to a higher level,
and to think charitably of each other. Occupying himself a palace he
lived simply, like other men. It was his greatest delight to retire to
his country home and there, dwelling among his books, to meditate upon
the great problems of life. He claimed that a man’s life should be
valued according to the value of the things to which he gave his
attention. If his whole thought was given to clothing, feeding and
housing himself comfortably, he should be valued like other well-housed
and well-fed animals. He would, however, derive the greatest pleasure
and benefit in this life by acting in accordance with reason, which
demands of every human being that his highest faculties should govern
all the rest, and that each should see to it that he treated his fellow
kindly and generously and that if he could not assist him to a higher
level he should at least not stand in his way. When he speaks of the
shortness of time and the value of fame, riches and power, for which
men strive in this world, he speaks not from the standpoint of one who
would wish to obtain these things, but as a Roman emperor enjoying the
highest honors that man might expect to attain in this world. He
certainly was in a position to speak intelligently concerning these
matters, and his opinions ought to have weight with the coming
generations. Children may not prefer to read such thoughts; perhaps the
majority of children do not prefer the Bible to other books. Still, we
all think it is well for them to be obliged to read it. Perhaps
requiring the use of such literature in the schools might be as
valuable as the adding, subtracting, multiplying and dividing of
interminable numbers, the memorizing of all the capes, bays and rivers
in the world, and the dates of all the battles that have occurred since
the creation of man. We should strive to stimulate the thinking powers
of children, leading them to form wise judgments concerning the
important things of life, without catering too much to their own wishes
at an age when they cannot form an intelligent opinion of what is best
for themselves.
At our first reading of the Thoughts of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, we
marked many sentences that appeared to us specially good; in the
second, twice as many more. Where all is good it is hard to emphasize,
but we will cite just one of his reflections, as illustrating the trend
of his mind: “I have often wondered,” he says, “how it is that every
man loves himself more than all the rest of men, and yet sets less
value on his own opinion of himself than on the opinion of others.”
We have given Long’s translation of the Thoughts complete, as published
by Messrs. Little, Brown & Co., but we have omitted some unimportant
portions of the biography and philosophy in the interest of space and
economy. We have also given the philosophy in a supplement, thinking it
better that it should come after the Thoughts themselves. We shall
issue a pocket edition on very thin paper for the convenience of such
as wish to make a special study of the work. We also propose to issue a
similar edition of the writings of Epictetus.
EDWIN GINN.
January 20, 1893.
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF MARCUS AURELIUS ANTONINUS.
M. Antoninus, the son of Annius Verus and Domitia Calvilla, was born at
Rome, A.D. 121. The Emperor T. Antoninus Pius married Faustina, the
sister of Annius Verus, and was consequently the uncle of M. Antoninus.
When Hadrian adopted Antoninus Pius and declared him his successor in
the empire, Antoninus Pius adopted both L. Ceionius Commodus and M.
Antoninus, generally called M. Aurelius Antoninus.
The youth was most carefully brought up. He thanks the gods (I. 17)
that he had good grandfathers, good parents, a good sister, good
teachers, good associates, good kinsmen and friends, nearly everything
good. He had the happy fortune to witness the example of his uncle and
adoptive father, Antoninus Pius, and he has recorded in his work (I.
16; VI. 30) the virtues of this excellent man and prudent ruler. Like
many young Romans he tried his hand at poetry and studied rhetoric.
There are letters extant showing the great affection of the pupil for
the master, and the master’s great hopes of his industrious pupil.
When he was eleven years old he assumed the dress of philosophers,
something plain and coarse, became a hard student, and lived a most
laborious, abstemious life, even so far as to injure his health. He
abandoned poetry and rhetoric for philosophy, and attached himself to
the sect of the Stoics. But he did not neglect the study of law, which
was a useful preparation for the high place which he was designed to
fill. We must suppose that he learned the Roman discipline of arms,
which was a necessary part of the education of a man who afterwards led
his troops to battle against a warlike race.
Antoninus has recorded in his first book the names of his teachers, and
the obligations which he owed to each of them. The way in which he
speaks of what he learned from them might seem to savor of vanity or
self- praise, if we look carelessly at the way in which he has
expressed himself; but if anyone draws this conclusion, he will be
mistaken. Antoninus means to commemorate the merits of his several
teachers, what they taught, and what a pupil might learn from them.
Besides, this book, like the eleven other books, was for his own use;
and if we may trust the note at the end of the first book, it was
written during one of M. Antoninus’ campaigns against the Quadi, at a
time when the commemoration of the virtues of his illustrious teachers
might remind him of their lessons and the practical uses which he might
derive from them.
Among his teachers of philosophy was Sextus of Chaeroneia, a grandson
of Plutarch. What he learned from this excellent man is told by himself
(I. 9). His favorite teacher was Rusticus (I. 7), a philosopher, and
also a man of practical good sense in public affairs. Rusticus was the
adviser of Antoninus after he became emperor. Young men who are
destined for high places are not often fortunate in those who are about
them, their companions and teachers; and I do not know any example of a
young prince having had an education which can be compared with that of
M. Antoninus. Such a body of teachers distinguished by their
acquirements and their character will hardly be collected again; and as
to the pupil, we have not had one like him since.
Hadrian died in July, A.D. 138, and was succeeded by Antoninus Pius. M.
Antoninus married Faustina, his cousin, the daughter of Pius, probably
about A.D. 146, for he had a daughter born in A.D. 147. He received
from his adoptive father the title of Caesar, and was associated with
him in the administration of the state. The father and the adopted son
lived together in perfect friendship and confidence. Antoninus was a
dutiful son, and the emperor Pius loved and esteemed him.
Antoninus Pius died A.D. 161. The Senate, it is said, urged M.
Antoninus to take the sole administration of the empire, but he
associated with himself the other adopted son of Pius, L. Ceionius
Commodus, who is generally called L. Verus. Thus Rome for the first
time had two emperors. Verus was an indolent man of pleasure, and
unworthy of his station. Antoninus however bore with him, and it is
said that Verus had sense enough to pay to his colleague the respect
due to his character. A virtuous emperor and a loose partner lived
together in peace, and their alliance was strengthened by Antoninus
giving to Verus for wife his daughter Lucilla.
The reign of Antoninus was first troubled by a Parthian war, in which
Verus was sent to command; but he did nothing, and the success that was
obtained by the Romans in Armenia and on the Euphrates and Tigris was
due to his generals. This Parthian war ended in A.D. 165. Aurelius and
Verus had a triumph (A.D. 166) for the victories in the East. A
pestilence followed, which carried off great numbers in Rome and Italy,
and spread to the west of Europe.
The north of Italy was also threatened by the rude people beyond the
Alps from the borders of Gallia to the eastern side of the Hadriatic.
These barbarians attempted to break into Italy, as the Germanic nations
had attempted near three hundred years before; and the rest of the life
of Antoninus, with some intervals, was employed in driving back the
invaders. In A.D. 169 Verus suddenly died, and Antoninus administered
the state alone.
During the German wars Antoninus resided for three years on the Danube
at Carnuntum. The Marcomanni were driven out of Pannonia and almost
destroyed in their retreat across the Danube; and in A.D. 174 the
emperor gained a great victory over the Quadi.
In A.D. 175, Avidius Cassius, a brave and skilful Roman commander who
was at the head of the troops in Asia, revolted and declared himself
Augustus. But Cassius was assassinated by some of his officers, and so
the rebellion came to an end. Antoninus showed his humanity by his
treatment of the family and the partisans of Cassius; and his letter to
the Senate, in which he recommends mercy, is extant.
Antoninus set out for the East on hearing of Cassius’ revolt. Though he
appears to have returned to Rome in A.D. 174, he went back to prosecute
the war against the Germans, and it is probable that he marched direct
to the East from the German war. His wife Faustina, who accompanied him
into Asia, died suddenly at the foot of the Taurus, to the great grief
of her husband. Capitolinus, who has written the life of Antoninus, and
also Dion Cassius accuse the empress of scandalous infidelity to her
husband and of abominable lewdness. But Capitolinus says that Antoninus
either knew it not or pretended not to know it. Nothing is so common as
such malicious reports in all ages, and the history of imperial Rome is
full of them. Antoninus loved his wife, and he says that she was
“obedient, affectionate, and simple.” The same scandal had been spread
about Faustina’s mother, the wife of Antoninus Pius, and yet he too was
perfectly satisfied with his wife. Antoninus Pius says after her death
in a letter to Fronto that he would rather have lived in exile with his
wife than in his palace at Rome without her. There are not many men who
would give their wives a better character than these two emperors.
Capitolinus wrote in the time of Diocletian. He may have intended to
tell the truth, but he is a poor, feeble biographer. Dion Cassius, the
most malignant of historians, always reports and perhaps he believed
any scandal against anybody.
Antoninus continued his journey to Syria and Egypt, and on his return
to Italy through Athens he was initiated into the Eleusinian mysteries.
It was the practice of the emperor to conform to the established rites
of the age, and to perform religious ceremonies with due solemnity. We
cannot conclude from this that he was a superstitious man, though we
might perhaps do so if his book did not show that he was not. But this
is only one among many instances that a ruler’s public acts do not
always prove his real opinions. A prudent governor will not roughly
oppose even the superstitions of his people; and though he may wish
that they were wiser, he will know that he cannot make them so by
offending their prejudices.
Antoninus and his son Commodus entered Rome in triumph, perhaps for
some German victories, A.D. 176. In the following year Commodus was
associated with his father in the empire, and took the name of
Augustus. This year A.D. 177 is memorable in ecclesiastical history.
Attalus and others were put to death at Lyon for their adherence to the
Christian religion. The evidence of this persecution is a letter
preserved by Eusebius. It contains a very particular description of the
tortures inflicted on the Christians in Gallia, and it states that
while the persecution was going on, Attalus, a Christian and a Roman
citizen, was loudly demanded by the populace and brought into the
amphitheatre; but the governor ordered him to be reserved, with the
rest who were in prison, until he had received instructions from the
emperor. Many had been tortured before the governor thought of applying
to Antoninus. The imperial rescript, says the letter, was that the
Christians should be punished, but if they would deny their faith, they
must be released. On this the work began again. The Christians who were
Roman citizens were beheaded; the rest were exposed to the wild beasts
in the amphitheatre.
The war on the northern frontier appears to have been uninterrupted
during the visit of Antoninus to the East, and on his return the
emperor again left Rome to oppose the barbarians. The Germanic people
were defeated in a great battle A.D. 179. During this campaign the
emperor was seized with some contagious malady, of which he died in the
camp, A.D. 180, in the fifty-ninth year of his age. His son Commodus
was with him. The body, or the ashes probably, of the emperor were
carried to Rome, and he received the honor of deification. Those who
could afford it had his statue or bust; and when Capitolinus wrote,
many people still had statues of Antoninus among the Dei Penates or
household deities. He was in a manner made a saint. Commodus erected to
the memory of his father the Antonine column which is now in the Piazza
Colonna at Rome. The bassi rilievi which are placed in a spiral line
round the shaft commemorate the victories of Antoninus over the
Marcomanni and the Quadi, and the miraculous shower of rain which
refreshed the Roman soldiers and discomfited their enemies. The statue
of Antoninus was placed on the capital of the column, but it was
removed at some time unknown, and a bronze statue of St. Paul was put
in the place by Pope Sixtus the fifth.
In order to form a proper notion of the condition of the Christians
under M. Antoninus we must go back to Trajan’s time. When the younger
Pliny was governor of Bithynia, the Christians were numerous in those
parts, and the worshippers of the old religion were falling off. The
temples were deserted, the festivals neglected, and there were no
purchasers of victims for sacrifice. Those who were interested in the
maintenance of the old religion thus found that their profits were in
danger. Christians of both sexes and of all ages were brought before
the governor, who did not know what to do with them. He could come to
no other conclusion than this, that those who confessed to be
Christians and persevered in their religion ought to be punished; if
for nothing else, for their invincible obstinacy. He found no crimes
proved against the Christians, and he could only characterize their
religion as a depraved and extravagant superstition, which might be
stopped if the people were allowed the opportunity of recanting. Pliny
wrote this in a letter to Trajan. He asked for the emperor’s
directions, because he did not know what to do. He remarks that he had
never been engaged in judicial inquiries about the Christians, and that
accordingly he did not know what to inquire about or how far to inquire
and punish. This proves that it was not a new thing to examine into a
man’s profession of Christianity and to punish him for it. Trajan’s
rescript is extant. He approved of the governor’s judgment in the
matter, but he said that no search must be made after the Christians;
if a man was charged with the new religion and convicted, he must not
be punished if he affirmed that he was not a Christian and confirmed
his denial by showing his reverence to the heathen gods. He added that
no notice must be taken of anonymous informations, for such things were
of bad example. Trajan was a mild and sensible man; and both motives of
mercy and policy probably also induced him to take as little notice of
the Christians as he could, to let them live in quiet if it were
possible. Trajan’s rescript is the first legislative act of the head of
the Roman state with reference to Christianity, which is known to us.
It does not appear that the Christians were further disturbed under his
reign.
In the time of Hadrian it was no longer possible for the Roman
government to overlook the great increase of the Christians and the
hostility of the common sort to them. If the governors in the provinces
were willing to let them alone, they could not resist the fanaticism of
the heathen community, who looked on the Christians as atheists. The
Jews too, who were settled all over the Roman Empire, were as hostile
to the Christians as the Gentiles were. With the time of Hadrian begin
the Christian Apologies, which show plainly what the popular feeling
towards the Christians then was. A rescript of Hadrian to Minucius
Fundanus, the Proconsul of Asia, which stands at the end of Justin’s
first Apology, instructs the governor that innocent people must not be
troubled, and false accusers must not be allowed to extort money from
them; the charges against the Christians must be made in due form, and
no attention must be paid to popular clamors; when Christians were
regularly prosecuted and convicted of illegal acts, they must be
punished according to their deserts; and false accusers also must be
punished. Antoninus Pius is said to have published rescripts to the
same effect. The terms of Hadrian’s rescript seem very favorable to the
Christians; but if we understand it in this sense, that they were only
to be punished like other people for illegal acts, it would have had no
meaning, for that could have been done without asking the emperor’s
advice. The real purpose of the rescript is that Christians must be
punished if they persisted in their belief, and would not prove their
renunciation of it by acknowledging the heathen religion.
In the time of M. Antoninus the opposition between the old and the new
belief was still stronger, and the adherents of the heathen religion
urged those in authority to a more regular resistance to the invasions
of the Christian faith. Melito in his Apology to M. Antoninus
represents the Christians of Asia as persecuted under new imperial
orders. Shameless informers, he says, men who were greedy after the
property of others, used these orders as a means of robbing those who
were doing no harm. He doubts if a just emperor could have ordered
anything so unjust; and if the last order was really not from the
emperor, the Christians entreat him not to give them up to their
enemies. We conclude from this that there were at least imperial
rescripts or constitutions of M. Antoninus which were made the
foundation of these persecutions. The fact of being a Christian was now
a crime and punished, unless the accused denied their religion. Then
come the persecutions at Smyrna, which some modern critics place in
A.D. 167, ten years before the persecution of Lyon. The governors of
the provinces under M. Antoninus might have found enough even in
Trajan’s rescript to warrant them in punishing Christians, and the
fanaticism of the people would drive them to persecution, even if they
were unwilling. But besides the fact of the Christians rejecting all
the heathen ceremonies, we must not forget that they plainly maintained
that all the heathen religions were false. The Christians thus declared
war against the heathen rites, and it is hardly necessary to observe
that this was a declaration of hostility against the Roman government,
which tolerated all the various forms of superstition that existed in
the empire, and could not consistently tolerate another religion, which
declared that all the rest were false and all the splendid ceremonies
of the empire only a worship of devils.
If we had a true ecclesiastical history, we should know how the Roman
emperors attempted to check the new religion; how they enforced their
principle of finally punishing Christians, simply as Christians, which
Justin in his Apology affirms that they did, and I have no doubt that
he tells the truth; how far popular clamor and riots went in this
matter, and how far many fanatical and ignorant Christians—for there
were many such—contributed to excite the fanaticism on the other side
and to imbitter the quarrel between the Roman government and the new
religion. Our extant ecclesiastical histories are manifestly falsified,
and what truth they contain is grossly exaggerated; but the fact is
certain that in the time of M. Antoninus the heathen populations were
in open hostility to the Christians, and that under Antoninus’ rule men
were put to death because they were Christians. Eusebius, in the
preface to his fifth book, remarks that in the seventeenth year of
Antoninus’ reign, in some parts of the world, the persecution of the
Christians became more violent, and that it proceeded from the populace
in the cities; and he adds, in his usual style of exaggeration, that we
may infer from what took place in a single nation that myriads of
martyrs were made in the habitable earth. The nation which he alludes
to is Gallia; and he then proceeds to give the letter of the churches
of Vienna and Lugdunum. It is probable that he has assigned the true
cause of the persecutions, the fanaticism of the populace, and that
both governors and emperor had a great deal of trouble with these
disturbances. How far Marcus was cognizant of these cruel proceedings
we do not know, for the historical records of his reign are very
defective. He did not make the rule against the Christians, for Trajan
did that; and if we admit that he would have been willing to let the
Christians alone, we cannot affirm that it was in his power, for it
would be a great mistake to suppose that Antoninus had the unlimited
authority which some modern sovereigns have had. His power was limited
by certain constitutional forms, by the Senate, and by the precedents
of his predecessors. We cannot admit that such a man was an active
persecutor, for there is no evidence that he was, though it is certain
that he had no good opinion of the Christians, as appears from his own
words. But he knew nothing of them except their hostility to the Roman
religion, and he probably thought that they were dangerous to the
state, notwithstanding the professions false or true of some of the
Apologists. So much I have said, because it would be unfair not to
state all that can be urged against a man whom his contemporaries and
subsequent ages venerated as a model of virtue and benevolence. If I
admitted the genuineness of some documents, he would be altogether
clear from the charge of even allowing any persecutions; but as I seek
the truth and am sure that they are false, I leave him to bear whatever
blame is his due. I add that it is quite certain that Antoninus did not
derive any of his ethical principles from a religion of which he knew
nothing.
There is no doubt that the Emperor’s Reflections—or his Meditations, as
they are generally named—is a genuine work. In the first book he speaks
of himself, his family, and his teachers; and in other books he
mentions himself.
It is plain that the emperor wrote down his thoughts or reflections as
the occasions arose; and since they were intended for his own use, it
is no improbable conjecture that he left a complete copy behind him
written with his own hand; for it is not likely that so diligent a man
would use the labor of a transcriber for such a purpose, and expose his
most secret thoughts to any other eye. He may have also intended the
book for his son Commodus, who however had no taste for his father’s
philosophy.
The last reflection of the Stoic philosophy that I have observed is in
Simplicius’ Commentary on the Enchiridion of Epictetus. Simplicius was
not a Christian, and such a man was not likely to be converted at a
time when Christianity was grossly corrupted. But he was a really
religious man, and he concludes his commentary with a prayer to the
Deity which no Christian could improve. From the time of Zeno to
Simplicius, a period of about nine hundred years, the Stoic philosophy
formed the characters of some of the best and greatest men. A man’s
greatness lies not in wealth and station, as the vulgar believe, nor
yet in his intellectual capacity, which is often associated with the
meanest moral character, the most abject servility to those in high
places, and arrogance to the poor and lowly; but a man’s true greatness
lies in the consciousness of an honest purpose in life, founded on a
just estimate of himself and everything else, on frequent
self-examination, and a steady obedience to the rule which he knows to
be right, without troubling himself, as the emperor says he should not,
about what others may think or say, or whether they do or do not do
that which he thinks and says and does.
THE THOUGHTS OF MARCUS AURELIUS ANTONINUS.
BOOK I.
1. From my grandfather Verus [I learned] good morals and the government
of my temper.
2. From the reputation and remembrance of my father, modesty and a
manly character.
3. From my mother, piety and beneficence, and abstinence, not only from
evil deeds, but even from evil thoughts; and further, simplicity in my
way of living, far removed from the habits of the rich.
4. From my great-grandfather, not to have frequented public schools,
and to have had good teachers at home, and to know that on such things
a man should spend liberally.
5. From my governor, to be neither of the green nor of the blue party
at the games in the Circus, nor a partisan either of the Parmularius or
the Scutarius at the gladiators’ fights; from him too I learned
endurance of labor, and to want little, and to work with my own hands,
and not to meddle with other people’s affairs, and not to be ready to
listen to slander.
6. From Diognetus, not to busy myself about trifling things, and not to
give credit to what was said by miracle-workers and jugglers about
incantations and the driving away of daemons and such things; and not
to breed quails [for fighting], nor to give myself up passionately to
such things; and to endure freedom of speech; and to have become
intimate with philosophy; and to have been a hearer, first of Bacchius,
then of Tandasis and Marcianus; and to have written dialogues in my
youth; and to have desired a plank bed and skin, and whatever else of
the kind belongs to the Grecian discipline.
7. From Rusticus I received the impression that my character required
improvement and discipline; and from him I learned not to be led astray
to sophistic emulation, nor to writing on speculative matters, nor to
delivering little hortatory orations, nor to showing myself off as a
man who practices much discipline, or does benevolent acts in order to
make a display; and to abstain from rhetoric, and poetry, and fine
writing; and not to walk about in the house in my outdoor dress, nor to
do other things of the kind; and to write my letters with simplicity,
like the letter which Rusticus wrote from Sinuessa to my mother; and
with respect to those who have offended me by words, or done me wrong,
to be easily disposed to be pacified and reconciled, as soon as they
have shown a readiness to be reconciled; and to read carefully, and not
to be satisfied with a superficial understanding of a book; nor hastily
to give my assent to those who talk overmuch; and I am indebted to him
for being acquainted with the discourses of Epictetus, which he
communicated to me out of his own collection.
8. From Apollonius I learned freedom of will and undeviating steadiness
of purpose; and to look to nothing else, not even for a moment, except
to reason; and to be always the same, in sharp pains, on the occasion
of the loss of a child, and in long illness; and to see clearly in a
living example that the same man can be both most resolute and
yielding, and not peevish in giving his instruction; and to have had
before my eyes a man who clearly considered his experience and his
skill in expounding philosophical principles as the smallest of his
merits; and from him I learned how to receive from friends what are
esteemed favors, without being either humbled by them or letting them
pass unnoticed.
9. From Sextus, a benevolent disposition, and the example of a family
governed in a fatherly manner, and the idea of living conformably to
nature; and gravity without affectation, and to look carefully after
the interests of friends, and to tolerate ignorant persons, and those
who form opinions without consideration: he had the power of readily
accommodating himself to all, so that intercourse with him was more
agreeable than any flattery; and at the same time he was most highly
venerated by those who associated with him: and he had the faculty both
of discovering and ordering, in an intelligent and methodical way, the
principles necessary for life; and he never showed anger or any other
passion, but was entirely free from passion, and also most
affectionate; and he could express approbation without noisy display,
and he possessed much knowledge without ostentation.
10. From Alexander the grammarian, to refrain from fault-finding, and
not in a reproachful way to chide those who uttered any barbarous or
solecistic or strange-sounding expression; but dexterously to introduce
the very expression which ought to have been used, and in the way of
answer or giving confirmation, or joining in an inquiry about the thing
itself, not about the word, or by some other fit suggestion.
11. From Fronto I learned to observe what envy and duplicity and
hypocrisy are in a tyrant, and that generally those among us who are
called Patricians are rather deficient in paternal affection.
12. From Alexander the Platonic, not frequently nor without necessity
to say to any one, or to write in a letter, that I have no leisure; nor
continually to excuse the neglect of duties required by our relation to
those with whom we live, by alleging urgent occupations.
13. From Catulus, not to be indifferent when a friend finds fault, even
if he should find fault without reason, but to try to restore him to
his usual disposition; and to be ready to speak well of teachers, as it
is reported of Domitius and Athenodotus; and to love my children truly.
14. From my brother Severus, to love my kin, and to love truth, and to
love justice; and through him I learned to know Thrasea, Helvidius,
Cato, Dion, Brutus; and from him I received the idea of a polity in
which there is the same law for all, a polity administered with regard
to equal rights and equal freedom of speech, and the idea of a kingly
government which respects most of all the freedom of the governed; I
learned from him also consistency and undeviating steadiness in my
regard for philosophy; and a disposition to do good, and to give to
others readily, and to cherish good hopes, and to believe that I am
loved by my friends; and in him I observed no concealment of his
opinions with respect to those whom he condemned, and that his friends
had no need to conjecture what he wished or did not wish, but it was
quite plain.
15. From Maximus I learned self-government, and not to be led aside by
anything; and cheerfulness in all circumstances, as well as in illness;
and a just admixture in the moral character of sweetness and dignity,
and to do what was set before me without complaining. I observed that
everybody believed that he thought as he spoke, and that in all that he
did he never had any bad intention; and he never showed amazement and
surprise, and was never in a hurry, and never put off doing a thing,
nor was perplexed nor dejected, nor did he ever laugh to disguise his
vexation, nor, on the other hand, was he ever passionate or suspicious.
He was accustomed to do acts of beneficence, and was ready to forgive,
and was free from all falsehood; and he presented the appearance of a
man who could not be diverted from right, rather than of a man who had
been improved. I observed, too, that no man could ever think that he
was despised by Maximus, or ever venture to think himself a better man.
He had also the art of being humorous in an agreeable way.
16. In my father I observed mildness of temper, and unchangeable
resolution in the things which he had determined after due
deliberation; and no vain-glory in those things which men call honors;
and a love of labor and perseverance; and a readiness to listen to
those who had anything to propose for the common weal; and undeviating
firmness in giving to every man according to his deserts; and a
knowledge derived from experience of the occasions for vigorous action
and for remission. And I observed that he had overcome all passion for
boys; and he considered himself no more than any other citizen; and he
released his friends from all obligation to sup with him or to attend
him of necessity when he went abroad, and those who had failed to
accompany him, by reason of any urgent circumstances, always found him
the same. I observed, too, his habit of careful inquiry in all matters
of deliberation, and his persistency, and that he never stopped his
investigation through being satisfied with appearances which first
present themselves; and that his disposition was to keep his friends,
and not to be soon tired of them, nor yet to be extravagant in his
affection; and to be satisfied on all occasions, and cheerful; and to
foresee things a long way off, and to provide for the smallest without
display; and to check immediately popular applause and all flattery;
and to be ever watchful over the things which were necessary for the
administration of the empire, and to be a good manager of the
expenditure, and patiently to endure the blame which he got for such
conduct; and he was neither superstitious with respect to the gods, nor
did he court men by gifts or by trying to please them, or by flattering
the populace; but he showed sobriety in all things and firmness, and
never any mean thoughts or action, nor love of novelty. And the things
which conduce in any way to the commodity of life, and of which fortune
gives an abundant supply, he used without arrogance and without
excusing himself; so that when he had them, he enjoyed them without
affectation, and when he had them not, he did not want them. No one
could ever say of him that he was either a sophist or a [home-bred]
flippant slave or a pedant; but every one acknowledged him to be a man
ripe, perfect, above flattery, able to manage his own and other men’s
affairs. Besides this, he honored those who were true philosophers, and
he did not reproach those who pretended to be philosophers, nor yet was
he easily led by them. He was also easy in conversation, and he made
himself agreeable without any offensive affectation. He took a
reasonable care of his body’s health, not as one who was greatly
attached to life, nor out of regard to personal appearance, nor yet in
a careless way, but so that through his own attention he very seldom
stood in need of the physician’s art or of medicine or external
applications. He was most ready to give without envy to those who
possessed any particular faculty, such as that of eloquence or
knowledge of the law or of morals, or of anything else; and he gave
them his help, that each might enjoy reputation according to his
deserts; and he always acted conformably to the institutions of his
country, without showing any affectation of doing so. Further, he was
not fond of change nor unsteady, but he loved to stay in the same
places, and to employ himself about the same things; and after his
paroxysms of headache he came immediately fresh and vigorous to his
usual occupations. His secrets were not many, but very few and very
rare, and these only about public matters; and he showed prudence and
economy in the exhibition of the public spectacles and the construction
of public buildings, his donations to the people, and in such things,
for he was a man who looked to what ought to be done, not to the
reputation which is got by a man’s acts. He did not take the bath at
unseasonable hours; he was not fond of building houses, nor curious
about what he ate, nor about the texture and color of his clothes, nor
about the beauty of his slaves.[1] His dress came from Lorium, his
villa on the coast, and from Lanuvium generally.[2] We know how he
behaved to the toll-collector at Tusculum who asked his pardon; and
such was all his behavior. There was in him nothing harsh, nor
implacable, nor violent, nor, as one may say, anything carried to the
sweating point; but he examined all things severally, as if he had
abundance of time, and without confusion, in an orderly way, vigorously
and consistently. And that might be applied to him which is recorded of
Socrates, that he was able both to abstain from, and to enjoy, those
things which many are too weak to abstain from, and cannot enjoy
without excess. But to be strong enough both to bear the one and to be
sober in the other is the mark of a man who has a perfect and
invincible soul, such as he showed in the illness of Maximus.
17. To the gods I am indebted for having good grandfathers, good
parents, a good sister, good teachers, good associates, good kinsmen
and friends, nearly everything good. Further, I owe it to the gods that
I was not hurried into any offence against any of them, though I had a
disposition which, if opportunity had offered, might have led me to do
something of this kind; but, through their favor, there never was such
a concurrence of circumstances as put me to the trial. Further, I am
thankful to the gods that I was not longer brought up with my
grandfather’s concubine, and that I preserved the flower of my youth,
and that I did not make proof of my virility before the proper season,
but even deferred the time; that I was subjected to a ruler and a
father who was able to take away all pride from me, and to bring me to
the knowledge that it is possible for a man to live in a palace without
wanting either guards or embroidered dresses, or torches and statues,
and such-like show; but that it is in such a man’s power to bring
himself very near to the fashion of a private person, without being for
this reason either meaner in thought, or more remiss in action, with
respect to the things which must be done for the public interest in a
manner that befits a ruler. I thank the gods for giving me such a
brother, who was able by his moral character to rouse me to vigilance
over myself, and who at the same time pleased me by his respect and
affection; that my children have not been stupid nor deformed in body;
that I did not make more proficiency in rhetoric, poetry, and the other
studies, in which I should perhaps have been completely engaged, if I
had seen that I was making progress in them; that I made haste to place
those who brought me up in the station of honor, which they seemed to
desire, without putting them off with hope of my doing it some other
time after, because they were then still young; that I knew Apollonius,
Rusticus, Maximus; that I received clear and frequent impressions about
living according to nature, and what kind of a life that is, so that,
so far as depended on the gods, and their gifts, and help, and
inspirations, nothing hindered me from forthwith living according to
nature, though I still fall short of it through my own fault, and
through not observing the admonitions of the gods, and, I may almost
say, their direct instructions; that my body has held out so long in
such a kind of life; that I never touched either Benedicta or
Theodotus, and that, after having fallen into amatory passions, I was
cured, and though I was often out of humor with Rusticus, I never did
anything of which I had occasion to repent; that, though it was my
mother’s fate to die young, she spent the last years of her life with
me; that, whenever I wished to help any man in his need, or on any
other occasion, I was never told that I had not the means of doing it;
and that to myself the same necessity never happened, to receive
anything from another; that I have such a wife, so obedient, and so
affectionate, and so simple; that I had abundance of good masters for
my children; and that remedies have been shown to me by dreams, both
others, and against bloodspitting and giddiness …; and that, when I had
an inclination to philosophy, I did not fall into the hands of any
sophist, and that I did not waste my time on writers [of histories], or
in the resolution of syllogisms, or occupy myself about the
investigation of appearances in the heavens; for all these things
require the help of the gods and fortune.
Among the Quadi at the Granua.[3]