"How much more greivous are the consequences of anger than the causes of it."
Marcus Aurelias
Marcus Aurelius (click title to entry - thank you) was one of the best men of heathen antiquity. Apropos of the Antonines the judicious Montesquieu says that, if we set aside for a moment the contemplation of the Christian verities, we can not read the life of this emperor without a softening feeling of emotion. Niebuhr calls him the noblest character of his time, and M. Martha, the historian of the Roman moralists, says that in Marcus Aurelius "the philosophy of Heathendom grows less proud, draws nearer to a Christianity which it ignored or which it despised, and is ready to fling itself into the arms of the Unknown God.” On the other hand, the warm eulogies which many writers have heaped on Marcus Aurelius as a ruler and as a man seem excessive and overdrawn. It is true that the most marked trait in his character was his devotion to philosophy and letters, but it was a curse to mankind that "he was a Stoic first and then a ruler". His dilettanteism rendered him utterly unfitted for the practical affairs of a large empire in a time of stress. He was more concerned with realizing in his own life (to say the truth, a stainless one) the Stoic ideal of perfection, than he was with the pressing duties of his office….
Just to relish the moment, many people, christians, don't know that monotheism started to take hold during the Roman Empire, but, not in Italy. Rome was proving to be a poor fortress and the 'new' empire would move east to Constantinople or the Byzantine Empire. Rome actually had a great deal of turbulence or a long time while the land east proved easier to protect from invasion.
Marcus Aurelias was one of the first Roman Emperors to seek a different diety. Philosophy was more important to him. His rule was far less vibrant than his predecessors, but, then Rome was hooked on adrenalin.
Marcus Aurelius (click title to entry - thank you) was one of the best men of heathen antiquity. Apropos of the Antonines the judicious Montesquieu says that, if we set aside for a moment the contemplation of the Christian verities, we can not read the life of this emperor without a softening feeling of emotion. Niebuhr calls him the noblest character of his time, and M. Martha, the historian of the Roman moralists, says that in Marcus Aurelius "the philosophy of Heathendom grows less proud, draws nearer to a Christianity which it ignored or which it despised, and is ready to fling itself into the arms of the Unknown God.” On the other hand, the warm eulogies which many writers have heaped on Marcus Aurelius as a ruler and as a man seem excessive and overdrawn. It is true that the most marked trait in his character was his devotion to philosophy and letters, but it was a curse to mankind that "he was a Stoic first and then a ruler". His dilettanteism rendered him utterly unfitted for the practical affairs of a large empire in a time of stress. He was more concerned with realizing in his own life (to say the truth, a stainless one) the Stoic ideal of perfection, than he was with the pressing duties of his office….
Just to relish the moment, many people, christians, don't know that monotheism started to take hold during the Roman Empire, but, not in Italy. Rome was proving to be a poor fortress and the 'new' empire would move east to Constantinople or the Byzantine Empire. Rome actually had a great deal of turbulence or a long time while the land east proved easier to protect from invasion.
Marcus Aurelias was one of the first Roman Emperors to seek a different diety. Philosophy was more important to him. His rule was far less vibrant than his predecessors, but, then Rome was hooked on adrenalin.
