Meditations (Translated by George Long with an Introduction by Alice Zimmern)

By Marcus Aurelius

Marcus Aurelius was born in Rome in 121 AD and would become its Emperor from 161 to 180. Considered by Machiavelli as the last of the good Emperors, Marcus Aurelius would become one of the most important of the Stoic philosophers. Educated in oratory, he would turn aside from rhetoric to the study of the Stoic philosophy, of which he was the last distinguished representative. The "Meditations," which he wrote in Greek, are among the most noteworthy expressions of this system, and exhibit it favorably on its practical side. The work is a series of twelve books that he intended for his own guidance and self-improvement, which picture with faithfulness the mind and character of this noblest of the Emperors. Simple in style and sincere in tone, they record for all time the height reached by pagan aspiration in its effort to solve the problem of conduct. In Marcus Aurelius’s practice of this philosophy along with his teaching he showed that “even in a palace life may be led well.” This edition follows the highly-regarded translation of George Long and includes an introduction by Alice Zimmern.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Digireads.com Publishing
• Release date: Jun 1, 2015
• ISBN: 9781420951110

Marcus Aurelius

"MARCUS AURELIUS ANTONINUS" was born on April 26, A.D. 121. His real name was M. Annius Verus, and he was sprung of a noble family which claimed descent from Numa, second King of Rome. Thus the most religious of emperors came of the blood of the most pious of early kings. His father, Annius Verus, had held high office in Rome, and his grandfather, of the same name, had been thrice Consul. Both his parents died young, but Marcus held them in loving remembrance. On his father's death Marcus was adopted by his grandfather, the consular Annius Verus, and there was deep love between these two. On the very first page of his book Marcus gratefully declares how of his grandfather he had learned to be gentle and meek, and to refrain from all anger and passion. The Emperor Hadrian divined the fine character of the lad, whom he used to call not Verus but Verissimus, more Truthful than his own name. He advanced Marcus to equestrian rank when six years of age, and at the age of eight made him a member of the ancient Salian priesthood. The boy's aunt, Annia Galeria Faustina, was married to Antoninus Pius, afterwards emperor. Hence it came about that Antoninus, having no son, adopted Marcus, changing his name to that which he is known by, and betrothed him to his daughter Faustina. His education was conducted with all care. The ablest teachers were engaged for him, and he was trained in the strict doctrine of the Stoic philosophy, which was his great delight. He was taught to dress plainly and to live simply, to avoid all softness and luxury.His body was trained to hardihood by wrestling, hunting, and outdoor games; and though his constitution was weak, he showed great personal courage to encounter the fiercest boars. At the same time he was kept from the extravagancies of his day. The great excitement in Rome was the strife of the Factions, as they were called, in the circus. The racing drivers used to adopt one of four coloursred, blue, white, or greenand their partisans showed an eagerness in supporting them which nothing could surpass. Riot and corruption went in the train of the racing chariots; and from all these things Marcus held severely aloof.In 140 Marcus was raised to the consulship, and in 145 his betrothal was consummated by marriage. Two years later Faustina brought him a daughter; and soon after the tribunate and other imperial honours were conferred upon him.

Book preview

cover.jpg

MEDITATIONS

By MARCUS AURELIUS

Translated by GEORGE LONG

Introduction by ALICE ZIMMERN

Meditations

By Marcus Aurelius

Translated by George Long

Introduction by Alice Zimmern

Print ISBN 13: 978-1-4209-5110-3

eBook ISBN 13: 978-1-4209-5111-0

This edition copyright © 2015. Digireads.com Publishing.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses permitted by copyright law.

Cover Image: Bronze statue of Emperor Marcus Aurelius located at the Piazza del Campidoglio, Rome, Italy. Photo © Sergey Kelin / Shutterstock.

Please visit www.digireads.com

CONTENTS

Introduction

Introductory Note

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

VIII

IX

X

XI

XII

The Life of Marcus Aurelius

The Philosophy of Marcus Aurelius

Introduction

Until philosophers are kings, and the princes of this world have the spirit and power of philosophy, and political greatness and wisdom meet in one, cities will never cease from ill—no, nor the human race, as I believe—and then only will our state have a possibility of life, and see the light of day. The truth is, that the state in which the rulers are most reluctant to govern is best and most quietly governed, and the state in which they are most willing is the worst.

Thus writes Plato in his Republic, laying down the conditions, which even to him appear impossible, under which a state may be wisely governed. The ruler must be a philosopher as well as a king; and he must govern unwillingly, because he loves philosophy better than dominion. Once in the history of the world these conditions were fulfilled: in Marcus Aurelius we find the philosopher king, the ruler who preferred the solitude of the student to the splendor of the palace, the soldier who loved the arts of peace better than the glory of war. It is with no small interest that we turn to the records of history to see what was the outward life led by this king; but even more willingly do we open the precious record of his own thoughts, which reveal to us the inner life of the philosopher.

Marcus Aurelius Antoninus was the adopted son of the Emperor Antoninus Pius, who died in 161 A.D. He had been brought up with the utmost care by his adoptive father, and received the best instruction in poetry and rhetoric, at that time the staples of a liberal education. But his favorite study was philosophy, and when only eleven years old he assumed the philosophers’ simple dress, adopted their mode of life; and finding that his inclination was chiefly towards Stoicism, he attached himself to this—the strictest of the philosophic schools. A discipline of monastic severity, that bade its followers disregard all bodily comfort, all that is commonly called pleasure, and care for naught but virtue, was indeed a strange training for one destined for the imperial purple, and it hardly appeared to be a fitting preparation for the cares of what was then the one great Empire of the world. True, the Stoics loved to call themselves citizens of the world, and to inculcate that cosmopolitanism that is broader and nobler than mere patriotism; but while they maintained in theory that the wise man should take part in politics, in practice there was always something in the existing state of things which made his doing so unadvisable. But Marcus Aurelius could not choose his own lot. Destined for the throne already by the Emperor Hadrian, associated in the empire even in his adoptive father’s lifetime, he could but accept his lot, and in striving to practice the noble principles he had learnt, pay to his Stoic teachers the truest tribute.

His was a troubled reign. The Roman Empire, which in the vigorous days of the Republic had been gradually but surely extending its boundaries, had been consolidated, and newly administered by Julius Caesar and Augustus. On the death of the latter it extended from the Atlantic on the west to the Armenian mountains and Arabian deserts on the east. On the south the African deserts had alone stopped the conquering arms, while on the north a line of natural boundaries was traced by the English Channel, Rhine, Danube, Black Sea, and Mount Caucasus. Warned by the ill-success that attended the later campaigns of his generals on the Lower Rhine, Augustus had cautioned his successors to aim at preserving rather than increasing their dominions. Thus it came about, that between the years 14 and 161 A.D., when Marcus Aurelius succeeded to the throne, only two fresh conquests had been made; Britain, a source of more trouble than profit to the empire, and Dacia, conquered by Trajan in 106 A.D.

Natural boundaries and Roman legions kept peace and security for many years within the circle of Roman dominion. But there were two weak points on these borders. On the north the hardy German tribes on the Danube and Upper Rhine, themselves hard pressed by Slavonian intruders from Russia, threatened to invade the Roman dominion; on the east the insolent Parthian, long the terror of the Roman arms, was a constant source of trouble and danger. The peace-loving Marcus Aurelius was obliged to cope with both these enemies. The arms, or rather the army, of the insolent and profligate Lucius Verus for a time subdued the Parthians, but no lasting peace was destined Marcus Aurelius. He himself conducted the campaigns on the Danube, and again and again beat back the northern enemy in wars, of which the chief interest to us now consists in the scant notes in the Meditations—This among the Quadi, this at Carmuntum, showing how these precious records of a pure and serene soul were composed amid the storms of battle and the elation of victory. Nor were his troubles confined to foreign wars. The plague, imported from the East, ravaged Italy, though it did the state good service in carrying off Lucius Verus, Marcus’s adoptive brother, whom, in obedience to the wishes of Antoninus, he had associated with himself in the empire. There were famines too in the land, with which the Emperor tried to cope by schemes of carefully-organized charity. And, lastly, Avidius Cassius, one of his most trusted and ablest generals, revolted in Syria, and tried to obtain for himself the empire, deeming it an easy matter to overcome a master who was so full of generosity and compassion that he could only inspire contempt in the mind of the unphilosophic soldier. The revolt was soon put down, but the leader was killed by one of his own officers. The Emperor expressed only his regret that he should have been thus deprived of the luxury of forgiveness, and he carefully destroyed all documents that could implicate any others in the revolt. Thus in all the trials of his life his philosophy inspired noble action, and he might worthily be added to the short list of those whom the Stoics acknowledged as really good and great.

Amid these records of gentleness and forbearance it seems strange to read that Marcus Aurelius permitted a cruel persecution of the Christians. Among the victims of this reign were Justin Martyr and Polycarp, and numbers suffered in a general persecution of the churches at Lyons and Vienne. It must not, however, be forgotten that the persecution was political rather than religious. Of the true teaching of Christianity Marcus Aurelius knew little and cared less; but its followers, in refusing to acknowledge a religion which included the Emperors among its deities, became rebels against the existing order of things, and therein culpable. Of the old sincere belief in the gods of Rome but little could survive in a state where the vote of the Senate had the power to add a new divinity to the already bewildering list. So much the more important were the outward forms, now that the actual belief was gone, and the bond between Church and State grew even closer, now that the Church could no longer stand alone. Of the various systems of philosophy at that time fashionable at Rome, all but the Epicurean could readily embody the creed of the old religion, and by treating the names of gods and heroes as mere symbols, they contrived to combine outward conformity with inner enlightenment. Not so the Christians. In their eyes the whole system of idolatry was accursed. A silent protest was insufficient. It was not enough to refrain from sacrifice themselves; in public and in private, in season and out of season, they exhorted others to do the like; not content with leaving the statues of the gods unhonoured, they would throw them from their pedestals, or insult them in the presence of the faithful. What wonder that the Romans looked on them with suspicion and hatred, and added to their real offences the pretended ones of eating human flesh and indulging in all manner of immorality. In our own more enlightened day we know what strange reports gather round any sect or school that happens to be unfashionable or unpopular. What wonder, then, that the secret meetings of the Christians should have given rise to strange rumors, and that the persecutions were the expression of a feeling with which a modern state might regard a set of men who were at once Mormons and Nihilists.{1} Add to this that the Christians often actually provoked persecution, and we cease to wonder, though we cannot but regret, that Marcus Aurelius, in simply allowing the law to take its course, should have failed to give an example of that perfect toleration to which Christianity itself has never yet attained. Let us be content to call him, with Farrar, the noblest of Pagan Emperors, and sorrowfully acknowledge that we must seek in vain for a Christian monarch to place beside him. Wars and troubles attended Marcus Aurelius to the very end of his days. In 177 A.D. fresh wars called him to the north. A presentiment seemed to tell his friends at Rome that they should not see him again, and they begged him to address them his farewell admonitions. There is nothing more striking in the whole of Aurelius’ career than this picture of the great general discoursing for three days before his departure for the wars on the deep questions of philosophy. This was indeed the last time he was seen at Rome. Worn out by anxiety and fatigue, after once more winning victory for the Roman arms, he died, in Pannonia, on March 17th, 180 A.D., mourned with a note of such true sorrow as never before or again was raised at the death of an Emperor.

It is time to inquire into the nature of that philosophy which was capable of exercising an influence so distinctly practical; yet, when we consider its teaching as laid down by its founders, its distinct materialism and impracticable ethics afford little suggestion of such fruits as it was destined to bear in the Roman world.

The Stoic school was founded by Zeno at Athens about 290 B.C. At this time Greek philosophy, which, under Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle, had lived through a short period of idealism, was returning to its naturally materialistic groove, and the founders of new systems looked back to the pre-Socratic physicists for some theory of the universe on which they might base their own. Metaphysical speculation had ceased to charm; it was practical ethics, a rule of life and conduct, that philosophy now desired to supply; and though these later schools based ethics on natural science, they were content to go back to the investigators of old for a system, instead of devoting themselves on their own account to scientific research. The two most important schools at this epoch were the Stoic and Epicurean; and while the latter sought in the atomic theory of Democritus, an explanation of the universe, the former reverted to the perpetual flux, the eternal, ever-changing fire of Heraclitus.

Before there was a heaven or earth there was a primitive fiery ether. This changes into all the other elements, and yet in its nature ever retains the fiery substratum. First this fiery ether transforms itself into a mass of vapor, then into a watery fluid. Out of this are developed the four elements as we know them: water, and solid earth, and atmospheric air, and lastly consuming, destructive fire, which is distinct from the everlasting ether. Fire and air are active elements; water and earth, passive. The creation begins to assume its present form with earth; dry earth, by reason of its weight, takes up a position at the centre of the universe, around it gather the waters, above both is the expanse of air, while fire and ether complete the whole, ever circling round the other elements which are at rest. The stars are fiery masses firmly embedded in ether, and nourished by the exhalations of terrestrial vapors. But they are also living beings, since they are formed out of living, animating fire, and they may thus be regarded as inferior or visible gods. The sun and the celestial deities, too, have their business assigned, says Marcus Aurelius.

The world is faultless, say the Stoics, and must therefore have been produced by an intelligent artificer. Hence the highest reason is immanent in the world, and must be regarded as self-conscious and personal. For has it not created man, who is self-conscious and personal, and can the created be greater than the creator? And yet, paradoxical as it may seem, the Stoic god is not a person, but is the fiery ether that pervades all things. This fiery substratum of all matter is its soul; the soul of the universe, which holds together all things in one fixed law, is God himself. In one aspect the Deity is but a fiery air-current; in another he is Zeus, the intelligent, almost personal lord of the universe. Both these aspects may be found in Marcus Aurelius; but in him the simpler ethical teaching, the gentle exhortation to a virtuous life, predominate over subtle speculation on the origin of things, and be speaks of God in language that suggests vividly to us the omnipotent, omniscient, Deity of Monotheism.

The Stoics traced back all things to formless matter and the informing, animating ether. Matter was in its nature eternal, since the underlying fire was imperishable; but all things were being gradually consumed, and at the end of a fixed period there would be a general conflagration, when all things should be reabsorbed into the Deity. Then once more they would be developed afresh, and another cycle begin.

"The world’s great age begins anew,

The golden days return,

The earth doth like a snake renew

Her winter weeds outworn,"

sings Shelley, but the Stoics expected no brighter Hellas, or fairer Tempes. The new things should be but as the old; in the new cycle there should be another Socrates, destined to marry another Xanthippe, and meet with the same rough treatment at her hands, and finally to be accused by Anytus and Meletus, and once more utter his glorious defense, and drain the cup of hemlock among his sorrowing disciples.

Some such scheme of the universe was certainly accepted by all the Stoics, but the later teachers, at any rate, attached little importance to it, except in as far as it demonstrated man’s intimate connection with the Deity and his fellowmen. They believed that the soul was material, and extended in space. It is the fiery current that is diffused through the body, and holds it together. They regarded it as the guiding or dominant principle, the indestructible divine spark. It is this, the reasoning element, which establishes the relationship between God, the universal reason, and man, to whose lot has fallen a minute share of it; while the brotherhood of Man is maintained in virtue of a kinship, not of flesh and blood, but of mind and reason. Though we are not just of the same flesh and blood, yet our minds are nearly related. (Marcus Aurelius, Med. ii. 1.)

Did the Stoics believe in a life after death? It is not easy to decide. They did not, like the Epicureans, fiercely deny it, maintaining that annihilation alone could remove the terrors of death. Undoubtedly the individual soul must at last be absorbed into the universal soul; but whether this happened at once, or not until the next conflagration, was a point on which authorities were not agreed. In any case, the soul must return to the Deity whence it sprang. This relation to the Deity was the fundamental point of Stoic ethics. It follows from the kinship that man’s true good must lie in conformity with the Deity. But God and reason are identical. Therefore, life in accordance with reason must be best suited to the constitution of the soul. And such a life must be in accordance with virtue. Hence this is the highest good, and happiness consists in virtue.

Thus the Stoics arrive at their main thesis. Virtue alone is admirable, virtue is absolutely self-sufficient; the good man needs no help from circumstances, neither sickness nor adversity can harm him; he is a king, a god among men. All so-called good, if it be not moral good, is included in the class of things intermediate, neither good nor bad. Such absolute claims for virtue had never before been made by any school. Aristotle had stipulated for sufficient external advantages to enable a man to devote himself without further care to the life of thought and virtue. The Stoics would permit of no such compromise. Virtue, and virtue only, was what they demanded. The virtuous man might be a slave, a victim to disease, to poverty, might be deprived of all he loved, yet he would remain solely and absolutely happy. Virtue was one and indivisible. Whoever was not virtuous was vicious; there was no middle course. Here was a point in their doctrine which could hardly be made to square with fact. We know too well that men are not divided into virtuous and vicious, but all possess some share of good and evil, and that most men desire what is right, and fail, when they do, from weakness rather than viciousness. The Stoics, who demanded absolute virtue and disregard of externals, had to confess that the wise men were few and the foolish legion; nay, when hard pressed to name their wise men, they would give a remarkable list—Hercules, Odysseus, Socrates, the Cynics Antisthenes and Diogenes; and in the later days of the school, Cato the younger, the only Stoic among the number.

Such a list alone appears to us sufficient condemnation of Stoicism in its earlier forms. Had no further advance been made, Stoicism would be of small interest to us now, but happily it was destined, as Capes remarks in his little handbook on Stoicism, to be tempered by concessions to common sense. The paradoxes about the wise man had been borrowed from Cynicism, which was regarded by the Stoics as a counsel of perfection. Diogenes in his tub, bidding Alexander stand out of his sunshine, might excite surprise and wonder; but a movement that should lead a whole community to abandon civilization and resort to life in tubs would be distinctly retrogressive. In later times Christian hermits have at best saved their own souls, and the exhortations delivered by St. Simeon Stylites from the top of his pillar cannot have influenced the gaping multitude as much as a noble life led in their midst. Without the practical element there would have been no life in Christianity, and Stoicism similarly had to descend from its pedestal, and walk among men.

First of all, the theory of absolute good and evil had to be modified. Virtue was still the only real good, and vice the only real evil; but besides these they now admitted a class of things to be preferred, and another of things to be avoided. Among the former might be included health, good repute, and other advantages which had formerly been summarily disposed of as indifferent. Again, while the impossible wise man still remained the ideal of Stoicism, it was admitted that there might be good men with lofty aims and blameless lives who should yet dwell among men as their fellows. In short, the wide gap between the sage and the fool was now filled up, and as a result the Stoic system was able to find a place for real, existing human beings.

These more practical developments were coincident with its introduction into the Roman world. The Romans were nothing if not practical. A nation of soldiers and lawyers, they had borrowed from Greece her culture, and adapted it to their own needs. So too they borrowed their philosophy. When conquered Greece led her barbarous conqueror captive, a few of the nobler minds at Rome discovered that there was something at Athens worth carrying off besides the statues. Some would spend a year or two at Athens studying philosophy; others induced the greatest teachers themselves to bring their doctrines to Rome; and in the first century B.C. all the Greek systems were represented

Reviews for Meditations (Translated by George Long with an Introduction by Alice Zimmern)

[bezoar44 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

(review of Gregory Hays translation, 2003 Modern Library edition)The Meditations are, as presented by Hays in his very helpful introduction, best understood as the private spiritual exercises of the Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius. Hays' introduction lays out the various philosophic strains that shaped Marcus Aurelius' thinking, and fits the work into the broader cultural context of late Roman attitudes towards life, philosophy, and religion. The translation is fluid and incisive, making the thoughts come alive.The Mediations will reward periodic rereading. The author spirals obsessively around a handful of philosophical themes: that everything we know, love, or hate is transient and will pass away; that freedom comes from accepting that most of the world - everything other than one's own choices about how to behave -- ultimately lies beyond one's control; that virtue is rooted in self-discipline. For most of us, there's a lot more to life than this, but as he works and reworks his themes, Marcus Aurelius reveals new angles or insights that give the Meditations a rich depth. Throughout, I kept wondering, with his focus on transience, self-discipline, and compassion towards others, what Marcus Aurelius would have made of Buddhism.Underlying its wisdom, the Meditations carries two striking internal tensions. The first may simply reflect the gap between the author's intent - personal spiritual exercises -- and the book's acquired status as a work for the ages. Marcus Aurelius constantly suggests that anyone in his audience can follow his advice and be free. On the other hand, the author's position -- a patriarch among patriarchs -- is hardly universal. Only for a person with great privilege could the problem of suffering look so manageable through simple willpower. This tension subsides if Marcus Aurelius really wrote for himself alone.The other major tension doesn't depend on the intended audience: Marcus Aurelius repeatedly orders the reader both to live in the present, and to be strategic - which necessarily implies thinking several steps ahead. That contradiction isn't unique to the Meditations; it's a challenge for all philosophic or religious systems that affirm transcendent values while also encouraging followers to engage and shape the world. While the tension is not resolved (can it ever be?), it gives the Meditations a realistic, pragmatic feel.

[msaucier818 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Honestly I was a bit disappointed with this. I think the disappointment might have been more about me and how I just wasn't feeling this type of book at the start of a vacation. There is nothing ground breaking in here, but is a series of proverbs about how to live your life. There were historical examples he used that I enjoyed, but overall the book did not leave a big impression on me.

[vetris-2 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Meditations shows one of the great philosopher kings, Marcus Aurelius, struggling with his internal views and grappling with his own brand of stoicism. It is structured in such a way that it seems like his own inner monologue is speaking to you through the pages. Even after all this time, it is full of great quotes that I will have to look back upon. It seems to repeat itself by addressing the topic in different ways, almost as if he was trying to convince himself to the truth of his writings through some inner debate.

[millata_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

This book is not my favourite of the Great Ideas series but it wasn't all bad either. I would categorise it as: "a classic you might as well read" because even if I wouldn't read it again there were still some good bits and as the book can be finished in one afternoon, you won't feel like you wasted a lot of time in the event you won't enjoy it.

[drewandlori · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This book was originally Marcus Aurelius's journal of philosophical notes to himself, and it definitely shows. Marcus was obviously a talented writer, and parts of it are very interesting, but he makes his points in a more or less random order, and it tends to get really repetitive. The repetition was probably great for Marcus, because it shows which ideas he really felt the need to constantly remind himself of, but on the other hand it's not that helpful for the rest of us.

[jill.mackin · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

A peaceful, thought provoking read.

[rkosarko-360552 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

ISBN: 9780679642602, Modern Library hardcover translated by Gregory Hayes

Wasn't what I was expecting given the book's reputation. Meditations is best described as more or less random scribblings that Marcus Aurelius put down in his private diaries, and was almost certainly not intended for anybody other than him to see. Lots of ideas and concepts are repeated quite frequently, and though it's in twelve 'books' the ideas aren't arranged in any particular logical order or with any particular theming.

Fascinating read, to see how people of the past thought and what they valued, but personally I don't think I got much useful philosophy out of it.

[dcunning11235 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

"Meditations" is a collection of aphorisms, musings, quotes, and, essentially, diary entries from a Roman emperor who would have been one of Plato's Philosopher-Kings. Concerned greatly with his philosophy (a Stoicism mixed with other influences) and how he should live his life, these are essentially notes and reflections meant for himself. As such, it must be admitted that there is quite a lot of repetition here. In some sense that is actually not bad: it becomes quite obvious that Marcus Aurelius struggled often and greatly to live up to the values and ethics he believed in.

Note: this is not the kind of book you sit down and read through, but rather pick through over days. If you do try to just run through it the above-mentioned repetition will somewhat ruin it.

[skybalon · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

A nice book with a vital prologue. There is no way I would have understood the list of proverbs without the background the prologue provides. The sayings/proverbs/thoughts are interesting and someone timeless. However, since even Marcus Aurelius was using these more as notes to remember than timeless moral messages, they all should be looked at with a grain of salt. This edition is well worth the read.

[petroglyph_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

This is not a book that was intended to be read all the way through: it’s a collection of notes to self, kept over a fairly long timeframe and across multiple locations, written in a terse, almost abbreviated style sometimes that would only have made sense to the author himself, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus Augustus, Emperor of Rome in the middle of the second century. Much of it is understandable, though, and even setting aside that the text is some eighteen hundred years old, it is a fascinatingly in-depth insight into a real person from Antiquity.

The Emperor’s diay tried his very best to be honest with himself and with others, and to treat his fellow human beings with the respect they cosmically deserve. He is nothing but frank and direct with himself; he is his own stern teacher and Superego.

Some bits are repetitive, in that there are things that Marcus Aurelius keeps reminding himself of over and over again: of his own mortality, first and foremost; of being ever rational; of his relative insignificance in view of time, space and the human multitudes; but also of the importance of maintaining mindfulness and humility while fulfilling his duties, or doing anything at all, for that matter. Above all he is concerned with occupying his rightful place in the order of things, both in the Universe and in Society. Presumably these were some of the things he struggled with most, or found hardest to implement consistently in his life.

Interestingly, there are many aphorisms strewn through the text, along with allusions to anecdotes or lines and characters from plays that illustrate a particular point: these Marcus Aurelius frequently does not elaborate upon and are merely there to serve as quick mnemonics for the larger lesson they remind him of. Some of these references are obscure, but others are to texts that have come down to us. That means it is important to find an edition with good footnotes! And my edition, edited and translated by Gregory Hays, was indeed wonderful. The translation really flowed: Hays clearly took pains to render the Emperor’s Greek into contemporary language. The footnotes and the explanatory introduction were great, as well.

[hermit_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

How do I rate this? I find this translation and writings of the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius to be quite easy to read and perhaps closer to what the author meant to elucidate. There is no question that Marcus Aurelius' writings rate five stars as does the translation. I must preface before you read on that this is a book you will wish to read more than once. I will not let the editors introduction take away from my rating. Remember we are here to read the writings of Marcus Aurelius Antoninus.

This is the editors George Long’s version of ‘The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius’. The editors introduction I found somewhat wanting but his translation along with inserted notes and prime sources were much welcomed. It is believed that these words were not written to be published and were the thoughts of the Roman emperor Marcus Aurelius and thus may give us the insights of the most powerful man in the world of his time. His writing is a masterpiece of Stoic philosophy and once you start reading his actual writings you will find them well thought out and easy to read.

Stoicism was considered system of philosophy that consisted of three distinct disciplines that included logic, ethics, and physics. Stoics in this time treated all philosophical problems by subjecting them to analysis using each of these disciplines in combination as equal parts of the Stoic system. And these writings do an excellent job of lettings us see this and glimpse some of understanding of the philosophy the emperor lived his life by. I spent much time interacting with generals of various armed forces and almost all of them has read ‘The Meditations of Marcus Aurelius’.

[booktsunami · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I guess I have several copies of the "Meditations" and this is just one more. (Though 2 of them are e versions). My excuse is that it was $1 and in excellent condition. I will probably give it to my son. (Actually, I have already bought him a copy but this might be a better edition). Quite a nice, comprehensive introduction and easy to read text. I first came across Marcus Aurelius when I bought some second hand books st the lower end of George Street when I was about 15 or 16 (can't even remember the names of the bookshops now but they were a favourite haunt of mine....Maybe it was Tyrrell's bookshop)....and I was immediately taken by the directness, the great common sense and the humanity shining through his thoughts. It actually became something of an inspiration to me for the rest of my life. I have always remembered (from that first reading at age 16, the quote about dealing with other people: "When you wake up in the morning, tell yourself: the people I deal with today will be meddling, ungrateful, arrogant, dishonest, jealous and surly. They are like this because they can't tell good from evil. But I have seen the beauty of good, and the ugliness of evil, and have recognized that the wrongdoer has a nature related to my own - not of the same blood and birth, but the same mind, and possessing a share of the divine. And so none of them can hurt me. No one can implicate me in ugliness. Nor can I feel angry at my relative, or hate him. We were born to work together like feet, hands and eyes, like the two rows of teeth, upper and lower. To obstruct each other is unnatural. To feel anger at someone, to turn your back on him: these are unnatural."Book 1, XV. (Actually, these are the words from another translation....the current version actually has it as ..."This day I shall have to do with an idle curious man, with an unthankful man, a railer, a crafty, false or an envious man; an unsociable uncharitable man....etc". Strange how something like that stays with one always....though I note as I've done a bit of research that this is a favourite quite from Marcus Aurelius and is re-used in just about all articles which include him. He has always struck me as the kind of person one would like to be .....and interesting that he never really thought of himself as a philosopher ...more as a practical man ..yet his Meditations come up in just about every review of Stoic philosophy.
A great book...though Maybe the Gregory Hays translation is a little easier to digest. (What is a "railer" anyway?....."arrogant", I guess).
I give it 5 stars.

[stevenjohntait · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Very good. A lot of it was over my head, so I wasn't entirely sure of what he was trying to tell me (or himself...) But this is a book I'll read again someday. It is a must for anyone interested in stoicism, or classical philosophy, or becoming the best version of themselves. It is also a great insight into the mind of a very interesting person.

[jerry.yoakum · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

It seems that Marcus Aurelius put a lot of effort into making it easy to get to the heart of ideas quickly. Which makes this a very quotable book.

“Waste no more time arguing what a good man should be. Be one.”

“Your mind will take the shape of what you frequently hold in thought, for the human spirit is colored by such impressions.”

“Not to feel exasperated, or defeated, or despondent because your days aren’t packed with wise and moral actions. But to get back up when you fail, to celebrate behaving like a human—however imperfectly—and fully embrace the pursuit that you’ve embarked on.”

Three Key Takeaway Lessons from Meditations
- “You have power over your mind – not outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength.”
- People will always do awful things but we are only responsible our own virtue.
- We will die, and we ought not waste our lives being distressed. We should focus on doing good for others with the unknowable amount of time we have left to live. To make this a part of our lives we must reflect regularly on the fact that we will die.

[isatyajeet · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Reading Aurelius is an enlightening experience and as one reads it, it becomes clear as to how erroneous some of our beliefs / actions are.
A foundation in stoic philosophy is essential to fully grasp the meaning of Marcus's maxims. Without a firm grounding in the stoic principles many of the aphorisms can appear to be morbid, conceited or advocating a life of resignation.
This book was written hundreds of years ago and is still valid to the most, this is wisdom of ages.
Do not read this book as a scholar, read it slowly and think about it!

[renzomalo · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

A good read as far as references books go, but as with the other translations, sooner or later you begin to wonder what was actually written before the language was "updated" or modernized. Still, it’s fascinating to be reading what a great historical figure was thinking and writing in the second century and then coming to realize that nothing much has changed in human behavior.

What made this translation a bit more interesting, however, was the biographical forward in which Mr. Hays describes, in brief, the life and times of Marcus Aurelius. This was fascinating to me UNTIL Mr. Hays went on safari in the in philosophical tall grass. I needed but a primer on "Logos," the prevailing philosophy of the time. And while I don't doubt that Mr. Hays thought that this was precisely what he wrote, that’s not how it read for me.

Lastly, it seems to me that the "meditations" could be summed up as follows: "To thine own self be true;" Seek and tell the truth; Do unto others as you would have done unto you; and know that everyone you know is struggling with something you know nothing about. Three and a half stars.

[antao-3 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

“Concentrate every minute like a Roman— like a man— on doing what’s in front of you with precise and genuine seriousness, tenderly, willingly, with justice. And on freeing yourself from all other distractions. Yes, you can— if you do everything as if it were the last thing you were doing in your life, and stop being aimless, stop letting your emotions override what your mind tells you, stop being hypocritical, self-centered , irritable. You see how few things you have to do to live a satisfying and reverent life? If you can manage this, that’s all even the gods can ask of you.”

In “Meditations” by Marcus Aurelius


“Para ser grande, sê inteiro: nada
Teu exagera ou exclui.
Sê todo em cada coisa. Põe quanto és
No mínimo que fazes.
Assim em cada lago a lua toda
Brilha, porque alta vive.”


In “Odes de Ricardo Reis” by Fernando Pessoa


Word of caution: this post is going to be all over the place.


I translated this into German a long time ago. I’m not sure I’m up to the task of translating this into English this time around…

Let’s give it a go:

“To be great, be whole: nothing
Of yours exaggerate or exclude.
Be all in everything. Put all you are
In everything you do.
Be like the moon that
Shines whole in every lake
Because it lives up high.”

'Employees that don't care' tend to be carried by their colleagues and managers, until a point whereby their un-professionalism makes their continued employment untenable; nobody wants their workload increased by having to prop up a free-loader. Not overly caring about work and being professional are not mutually exclusive - the “not overly caring” just means not getting too emotional about work, having an objective view about what's achievable and not letting personal feelings interfere too much. Actually it's the opposite. Understanding what's important, not getting bogged down in minutiae and focusing on priorities is perfectly doable while not giving a shit. A lot of people waste their day moaning how busy they are, talking crap in meetings and generally not doing any actual work - while looking like they really care. If someone is continually self-sacrificing in picking up slack to the point of martyrdom, is it your issue or theirs? I fail to see why this is an image worth aspiring to.

I think Bhuddism has a lot more baggage than stoicism though and at some level with the meditation and worldview anticipates neuroscience that was to come 2000 years later. They intuited that we were meat puppets and they managed to see behind the veil of our always chattering mind. I don't think stoicism was that clear-sighted. The messages along the lines of "if you don't work hard others have to pick up the slack" amaze me. Why do others need to pick up the slack? Why is it in your interest that you work extra hard for your company, or that your company makes more profits. Are you going to see any of that? No you are not. Pick up the slack for whom exactly? Incredible self-righteous slave mentality that perfectly illustrates the plutocracy we live in. It can also become a situation whereby if you are continuously picking up the slack, others may leave things for you to as 'sure Doggybone will do it, he practically lives here', while he get to leave early. Being a martyr for a company, work group or manager is a fool’s move: “Doggy got the bone!”

I advocate ducking out of professional life’s more pointless rituals, like (some) conference calls. “I have never been on a conference call where something actually got decided or accomplished,” some people might say. Might work for some. I have done most of my boldest and successful things by conference call. I've usually met them previously, but not always. The phone is a terrible, wonderful thing. I hate it in lots of ways, but it’s useful to run a business when your partners are in different facilities and sometimes countries! I think it’s important to recognise the times in work when a little extra effort is needed and apply yourself in those moments. Making sure you hold the line and persevere until the problem or task has been resolved will get you far.

About twenty years ago I found myself looking at a picture of the tombstone of Man Ray, in Montparnasse cemetery (I was visiting Berardo’s exhibition in Lisbon and I became fascinated by some of his paintings on show). Man Ray’s tombstone was a simple, concrete slab, and it had just four hand written words written on it by hand by Juliette Man Ray. They read: “Unconcerned, but not indifferent.” I lost track of the time I stood in stunned silence, contemplating this thought (I was still in the exhibition; I like to look up artists online I’m not familiar with when I’m go to museums or art exhibitions). This particular thought has become my own rallying cry, and it's made a huge difference to how I work since a few years ago. This means, I'll do what I can, to the best of my ability, and as quickly as I can. If others want to stay late, needlessly fretting over largely pointless nonsense, that's their issue. I aim to stay detached, but alert. So I've gradually managed to shift my perspective to I'll come in, I'll do my job and - on occasion when required - will work above and beyond to make shit happen but I'm damned if I'll be a martyr to the cause. I worked with one of those some years ago, and, frankly, it was exhausting to be around. He was also one of the least organised and least productive members of our team. I also am very comfortable speaking to all directors as equals and don't shy away from a healthy debate around decisions and strategy (I was once a 2nd line SAP Manager so I know what I’m talking about). In fact, these days I rather enjoy it. As a result, work has become easier and my productivity has increased. Worry can make you an incredible procrastinator. So, in conclusion, not giving a fuck is truly liberating. I highly recommend it.

Turning to the books at hand, which I read for the umpteenth time, I think Buddhism has a lot more baggage than stoicism though and at some level with the meditation and worldview anticipates neuroscience that was to come 2000 years later. They intuited that we were meat puppets and they managed to see behind the veil of our always chattering mind. I don't think stoicism was that clear-sighted. I agree with the stance that learning when to give a fuck and when not to is at the crux of the matter, because it is exhausting and impossible to keep on top of the chaos of reality in an ordered way. Sometimes you've just got to realize that some things don't turn out how you expected them to and be at peace with that fact. Some years ago, I started coming to work with mismatched socks. My thoughts were that the people who saw me without shoes knew me well enough to get the point - and I have to say it gave me a perverse sort of pleasure going to meetings with my directors knowing I had mismatched socks :-) Small minds and all that :-) Life's too short to be concerned about wearing matching socks...

NB: I finished this book on the 18th of April after having been told that a colleague of mine from work, who I had worked with at a major client, had passed away at the tender age of 41 years old. This review reflects the way my take on life is starting to shift. I know I’m a bit late, but better late than never…

[rivkat_2 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Remember that you will die soon, Aurelius says, and you will behave properly, without too much concern for glory. After all, anyone who remembers you will also soon die, in the larger scheme of things, and you’ll all be dead much longer than you were alive.

[knotbox · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Philosophy was a hard sell for me to actually read, I’ll admit. In high school I always wanted to be someone who could quote and understood ancient philosophers. I’ve acquired several books and never read them. But when a friend shared a quote from this book that struck a chord, I knew I would actually read this one. Even if it did take me a rather long time.

Here’s a snippet of that quote:

You will never be remarkable for quick-wittedness. Be it so, then; yet there are still a host of other qualities whereof you cannot say, 'I have no bent for them.' Cultivate these, then, for they are wholly within your power: sincerity, for example, and dignity; industriousness, and sobriety.

It’s worth mentioning that I have questions about his views on slavery and think he may have been a misogynist, but also that every single “you” in this text was addressed to himself. Apparently this masterful philosopher and emperor struggled with certain concepts a lot and attempted to steer his mind to better thoughts. It’s really commendable. I doubt my own ‘notes to self’ would be as compelling.

I’ve heard it from several readers, the Penguin Great Ideas edition is really good. I marked that sucker up, and despite a slow and rocky beginning find myself thinking often of things that Marcus has said and wanting to re-read and share things with everyone. We disagree on a lot, but still, I’d love to hang out with that dude.

"You don't mind if I call you Marcus, do you?" I’ll say when I drop in to have a beer in his courtyard, put my feet up on the furniture and annoy the shit out of him.

I'm really glad I read it.

[viking2917_1 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Reading just a few paragraphs a day is great way to center yourself before every day. Amazing book.

[automatthias · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

"Yes, that's what I think too" was the my main reaction to the book. I missed many references to known figures of Marcus' time, but it would require a book with extensive footnotes to cover all the material. The part I don't quite buy is the living according to nature, because nature is rather hard to define.

[albertgoldfain · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

Succinct self-help for the stoic. The introduction in the Modern Library edition sets the historical context well and the translation makes most of the advice read as practical and not overly-repetetive.

[adamwolf_1 · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

I read the Hays translation, and enjoyed this quite a bit. I'll be thinking about it for a while.

[shdawson · Rating: 4 out of 5 stars]

Some ranting, but still a good read. Take the writing in context of a successful though dying person.

[johnxlibris · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

There is something about Marcus Aurelius's brand of Stoicism that appeals to me. His almost simple belief in the power of reason and truth is comforting. His text offers helpful habits of mind that would be appreciated by anyone who values the practice of mindfulness and attention. I can easily see myself coming back to this book later in life.

[jmcdbooks · Rating: 1 out of 5 stars]

Rated: F
Oh, I tried. Night after night I would try to digest a few more random thoughts from this stoic Emperor of Rome. I'm not a stoic for sure. Finally gave up about 2/3 through the book. Very few nuggets could I hold up as true in more own life. I rarely give up on a book. Just had to with this one.

[kurt.rocourt · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

The thing that keeps being repeated in this book is don't do bad. Maybe a sign of a guilty conscience, I don't know. It is the theme for this book in any case.

[riskedom · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

The main attraction of this book is that it is a book of philosophy written by an emperor. If it was written by someone of more lowly stature it would surely have been forgotten. It is a good insight into his mind but an unfortunate boon to those who love to think the best rulers are those who think philosophically. It would be more interesting to me if it was written by some unknown blacksmith, tailor or farm slave. At least then the question of how they acquired an education in Stoic philosophy would be interesting speculation. Nonetheless, there is some wisdom in the writings and it is encouraging to know that in the midst of such grueling military campaigns he could find time to compose a journal of something other than the progress of the legions against the barbarians.

[nielsengw_1 · Rating: 3 out of 5 stars]

Marcus Aurelius was Emperor of the Roman Empire from 161 to 180 CE. Considered the last of the Five Good Emperors, he oversaw his empire with stoicism and equality. In his Meditations, written while on a military campaign in the last decade of his life, he sets forth a series of aphorisms, letters, and principles that he tried to live by. As a stoic, he thought that powerful emotions were the cause of errors in life and so sought to live a life of a more moral and intellectual manner.

The Meditations aren’t really written for an audience, and this translation is a little stilted. But what you can tell is that Marcus Aurelius is trying to reflect upon a rather interesting life. There are times when he is contented in good memories and times when the ennui of his stoic life gets to him. But the overall message is to live a good life (“Death hangs over you: while you live, and while you may, be good”) and try not to be too overly swayed by things outside of one’s control. “It is not right to vex ourselves at things,” he says, “for they care not about it.”

In the end, Marcus Aurelius’s message is both honorable and interesting. The writing takes a little getting used to, so it would behoove readers to find a good translation. It is, however, a rather good beginning look into stoicism and its effectiveness in the proper hands. Marcus Aurelius, when set against the likes of Nero and Domitian, rules in the vein of a philosopher king and tries desperately to do right by his people. All in all, a refreshing and intellectual book.

[joeodeg · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

I have read this book a number of times and always gain something new each time I revisit it. Although I find aspects of Stoic thinking quite foreign, there is unquestionably a disciplined and humble mind behind these words. I wish more of our contemporary leaders could muster the courage to be as humble.