Reading this now. I could be a contrarian and say it's overrated, but it's not- it's really fucking good. One quibble...

you get it differently than it should be gotten.

but im certainly not the one who can tell you why and what or how.

kek'd
those pics are gold post more pls

...

...

But he wasn't trying to make some philosophical treatise, it was his diary. The way he wrote it honestly makes me feel like writing was a strategy for him to reflect and he would just write down his thought process. People happened to find it and like it. You could call any other philosophy navel-gazing masturbation with the same exact argument.
Calling one of the most celebrated Roman Emperors and someone whose name is synonymous with good leadership and governance a failure of a man is also hilarious when you hear it from someone posting "I am smart" memes on a congolese lampshade crafting imageboard.

>it was his diary

So you're saying Aurelius was the original "my diary desu" shitposter?

>But he wasn't trying to make some philosophical treatise, it was his diary.

Whether or not he intended for it to be published, my point still stands.

>Calling one of the most celebrated Roman Emperors and someone whose name is synonymous with good leadership and governance a failure of a man is also hilarious

Not really. The fault with with that perception of Aurelius - a common misconception, if you will. At the time of writing, Aurelius had lost practically everything. Being a good emperor at the time when Rome was moribund is hardly much of an achievement. Ruling Rome at its height was a much more demanding affair.

No matter how good the parent is, some kids are just bent on being little shits.

It was more of a philosophical exercise book which he used for therapeutic purposes.

>those who can't do, teach

Marcus was only trying to teach himself with the meditations. As I explained above. And Marcus certainly never held himself as an exemplar of Stoic philosophy, he was actually very critical of himself.

>why was his son such a dissolute piece of shit?

A contemporary source claims that Commodus was rather simple minded, and fell in with a "bad crowd" of people which corrupted his easily swayed mind. From what I've seen Marcus did as much as a father possibly could have done to make his son a good man. He provided the best possible education, and even allowed Commodus to rule alongside him as co-emperor for a time to prepare him as a successor. Marcus making someone else emperor would have likely led to a civil war, unless Commodus was killed.

I feel like I have to respond because every stoicism thread always has a number of people cropping up to sling shit at subjects that they know nothing about. Here those subjects are Stoicism, Stoicism as practiced by Marcus Aurelius, and the History and context surrounding the life of Marcus Aurelius, especially with regard to the mystifying product that ended up being his son, Commodious.

Why did Commodious end up the way he did? For a number of reasons.

To begin with, there simply was no precedent for Commodious' situation. Surprisingly, Commodious was the first ever Prince/Emperor "born in the purple," that is, raised from birth as a prince/emperor. In the 150 odd year history of the Empire, there had never been a similar case. That's right, even shitheads like Caligula and Nero had only swung in by chance/scheming into the purple, so having a young man growing up with all the expectations/praise that are given to the ruling/semi-divine was new for everybody.

A funny thing about those other shithead emperors, Caligula and Nero, that Commodious had in common with them was age. Indeed, of the shittiest emperors the empire ever had, the commonality among the worst was usually a young age. This has been posited perhaps correctly as what simply happens when you take someone in the throws of cocky youth and tell them that they are literally a god-emperor, let alone all those hanger on sycophants that generally cluster around the wealthy and powerful. From this perspective, you could say that Commodious never stood a chance of not totally sucking. Finally to this, however, we must add that in the history of the empire, there were great men, and men that while not bad, simply weren't "great" individuals. Commodious perhaps didn't start off too bad, he was maybe just a bit simple or weak. But it was the overwhelming environment that fast ingrained and morphed that minor character of his into a degenerative state.

But couldn't Marcus have done something about it? Wasn't he aware of what was happening with his son? Again, its funny we bring up the "giving too much power to youths fucking them" up factor, as Marcus himself was guided away from this very thing. It was the emperor Hadrian who first saw the marvelously virtuous (and yeah, maybe "dat ass" played into it too) Marcus when the latter was but a boy, and he already felt that this Marcus would one day be a good emperor. Rather than outright adopting him, Hadrian pulled a hat-trick by 'adopting' an older senator named Antoninus as his heir and emperor to be with the proviso that he in turn adopt the young Marcus. This was done precisely to avoid having Marcus come to power as a youth of 18-22, and thus borne to the overwhelming environment in the most exposed part of our lives.

...

[continued from above]

Hadrian however, never banked on what happened and kept happening next. When he adopted Antoninus, Hadrian was expecting the already long-in-tooth senator to die in about ten years or so, leaving Marcus to come to power in emotional and intellectual maturity, with a bit of dashing youth still haloing around the edges. This didn't happen because Antoninus proceeded to live for a full 23 years. 23 full years. Now these years weren't bad, in fact they represent the hump of the lustrous 'Pax Romana' which Gibbon wrote as being a hundred years of the happiest, most well off period in the history of humanity, but they were perhaps bought off for a price that would have to be dealt with later. Antoninus, despite being a good man and fairly good emperor, upon accession insisted that the growing Marcus accompany him always accompany him, ostensibly in order that Marcus may best learn how to deal with the daily going-ons as Emperor. This had a twofold effect: 1) Antoninus being perhaps the biggest homebody emperor imaginable, this meant that Marcus never saw much beyond the environs of Rome for 23 years, so roughly from around the time he was 17 or so, till his own accession at the age of 40. Wise as he was, this probably lead to a certain degree of ‘stunting’ in his view of the world. We might speculate on what those were a little later on. And 2) this cloistering, as well as a few other habits that Antoninus had, led to promoting a sort of “peace at any cost” state of mind that meant more often than not that if the empire had any trouble, it was to be purchased away. Thus, small Marcomanni rebellions and Persian infractions were waved off only to the effect of allowing them to fester and broil into situations that would boil over upon Marcus’ accession. And indeed, when Antoninus finnnally kicked the bucket, the empire was immediately beset with multiple invasions and minor rebellions. And on top of this, a plague brought back by “everybody loves Optimus” Trajan from Mesopotamia was finally beginning to ravage the empire, depleting its taxable base, it’s soldier base, and genuinely making for a tense atmosphere (for the ever superstitious Romans, plague means disfavor from the Gods, remember that).

[continued from above]

So Marcus has to immediately take on a number of problems of the storm that had been brewing for years. Did he demonstrate wisdom in the manner that he did so? Yes. In another rather unprecedented move, Marcus, upon taking the throne seeks a co-emperor in his step-brother Lucius -- a bit of a party-loving gloryhog, who was nevertheless loyal to Marcus -- already feeling that the issues at present necessitated the autocratic leadership of more than one man. A rather magnanimous move, or at least responsible. The guy was swamped. Being an emperor during a situation that Antoninus faced -- peace, prosperity, good fortune -- is already an all-day job. You have senators asking if a building project can be made over here, using ‘his’ personal farm to provide the labor, you have law cases that sometimes reach him. You’re dealing constantly with everyone asking favors. Now throw on top of that two invasions, a plague, an almost civil war, and a co-emperor who, while helpful, is still being a drunken lecher and you’re going to be a guy swamped in the way that only Florida can sympathize with. A guy who, may I remind you, in his youth stated that all he wanted to do was be a philosopher. Does he whine and moan about it? No, he keeps his frustrations to himself and puts off his personal desires in order to focus on restoring the empire.

But his failing Commodious? Marcus Aurelius took the throne already having to wrestle with a million issues in 161 AD. When was Commodious born? 161 AD. Knowing what we already know about the problems Marcus faced, it becomes easy to sympathize with the idea that maybe Marcus simply didn’t have the time to focus on Commodious, and trusted, to disastrous effect, that he might be reared by palatial tutors, that he wouldn’t merely be coddled and praised like the divine prince that he was. But we must also note something else rather tragic. Commodious was the only survivor of three sons that Marcus had. The other two dying before either had reached 10. Can you forgive those surrounding Commodious for coddling him? Treasuring him? Thinking him favored? Can you forgive Commodious for thinking so? Let alone the other associated traumas involved in experiencing the death of siblings, how often it can drive children to seek attention, adoration in unusual ways.

[continued from above]

And it wasn’t as if Marcus wasn’t aware of Commodious’ character and its flaws. The accounts we have suggest that Marcus was troubled by the issue of succession worried that the throne would go to Commodious. Remember that Marcus Aurelius had a lot of his life planned out for him specifically on the premise that he would be a good Emperor, just not “ready” until he was older. Older eventually being the age of 40. Wise as he is, this must have created some blind spots in his reasoning. And we know too that Marcus was fully conscious of his impending mortality (a theme throughout the Meditations) and thus, someone would have to follow him. But Marcus was thus tasked with a difficult choice. Choose someone other than his son. Have his son killed. Or choose his son. The former wouldn’t do. Marcus was aware that his son was beloved by the military, having accompanied them since being a boy, as Marcus tried to take him with him and educate him along the way. To choose someone else and leave easily suggestible Commodious alive would be precluding a Civil war. So, does he kill his son?? Can you ask that of any man? If there was ever a blindspot capable of undoing all of the best philosophy, wouldn’t it be the love of your child? Thus, Marcus simply had to appoint Commodious as successor and hope for the best, that he would grow out of it. That late in his reign, Marcus may have felt that he had ‘just about’ tied up all the loose ends of the empire. During his reign, Marcus pushed back the Persians, dealt where and how he could with the plague, put down a civil war, and had just about quashed the Marcomanni into oblivion and submission. He just needed one final invasion, and then he might be able to focus on educating his son, or at least living long enough to push the age of succession for Commodious past 30.

Lo, Marcus catches and dies of the plague, leaving Commodious to succeed him at the super tender age of 19. How many of you fucks are 19? I loathe to imagine what a 19 year old kid with a porsche does, let alone the full reigns of God-Emperor hood and Empire. Put on top of this that Commodus was allegedly rather handsome and athletic, and you have ingredients that no ideology or practice could surmount.

You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about. That said, nice pics

>You don't have the slightest clue what you're talking about

That's where you're wrong. I've said more in a few lines than you have in all your pasta.

First Rule of Smart: quality, not quantity.

Really great posts, thanks for the read. What book(s) did you get the bulk of the information from?

if noone liked him, and thought he was absolutely unvirtuous, why how would he ever become emperor, especially the powerful around him, or is it that, once his father was gone, he become emperor, and then just did their own thing, the temptations of being a corrupt politician can weigh heavy?

onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781444311075.oth1/pdf

Oxford Edition of Meditations with the Selected Correspondence

And Anthony Birley's biography

From then, its just stuff from all over

Thank you.

lmao

Having virtue and being perceived as a virtuous person are two very different things.

is that sun/moon shitting on that guy in the piss pool?