@@ 0,0 1,416 @@
++++
+title = "Book review: Meditations, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus"
+description = """
+A short review of the personal journal of a Roman Emperor with a strongly Stoic
+personal philosophy.
+"""
+slug="marcus-aurelius-meditations"
+date = 2022-01-13
++++
+
+## Introduction
+
+Having recently decided to do some more (non-fictional) reading, I started by
+picking up some literature already available to me, starting with _Meditations_.
+My copy was translated and annotated by Martin Hammond, and published by Penguin
+Classics.[^citation]
+
+The _Meditations_ are the surviving writings of Marcus Aurelius, created later
+in his life and not intended to be published. Nevertheless, it serves as an
+interesting glimpse into the mind of a particularly interesting and (for his
+time) important character. Most entries ("chapters") serve as reminders to
+himself for how he should think or behave, or justify his beliefs with
+rhetorical arguments.
+
+Hammond's notes provide some helpful context, and regularly spares you from
+jumping to your own research when Marcus brings up things you're unfamiliar with
+\- though some have been lost to history. He also links related chapters
+together, which is handy for jumping through Marcus' repeated explorations of
+the same idea.
+
+## Summary
+
+I'll summarise the ideas and themes that stood out in my reading of the
+_Meditations_.
+
+### A universal order
+
+Marcus regularly talks about a universal order which he believes governs all
+things. He refers to this order in various ways, including god / the gods,
+_Nature_, and _the Whole_. He describes this order almost as if it were
+conscious:
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 10, Chapter 6") %}
+Nothing which benefits the Whole can be harmful to the part, and the Whole
+contains nothing which is not to its benefit.
+{% end %}
+
+From this perspective he insists on the existence of the gods, and that the
+order they bring about is inherently good:
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 6, Chapter 44") %}
+Now if the gods took thought for me and for what must happen to me, they will
+have taken thought for my good. It is not easy to conceive of a thoughtless god,
+and what possible reason could they have had to be bent on my harm? What
+advantage would there have been from that either for themselves or for the
+common good, which is the main concern of their providence? If they did not take
+individual thought for me, then certainly they took thought for the common good,
+and since what happens to me is a consequential part of that, I should accept
+and welcome it.
+{% end %}
+
+### The divinity of rationality
+
+A quintessential idea of Stoicism is the importance of human logic and
+rationality, and Marcus applies a religious fervour to this. He describes the
+_directing mind_ as the "god within". While he also maintains the existence of
+the actual gods (the "god without"), it is rather striking to deify rationality
+itself.
+
+He later applies this concept when discussing good and evil, combining it
+with the universal order:
+
+{% quote(source="Book 9, Chapter 4") %}
+The sinner sins against himself: the wrongdoer wrongs himself, by making himself
+morally bad.
+{% end %}
+
+Humans sin against the universal order and themselves when they act
+irrationally, and when they do not accept - or contravene - things brought about
+by Nature:
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 2, Chapter 16") %}
+The soul of a man harms itself, first and foremost, when it becomes (as far as
+it can) a separate growth, a sort of tumour on the universe: because to resent
+anything that happens is to separate oneself in revolt from Nature, which holds
+in collective embrace the particular natures of all other things. Secondly, when
+it turns away from another human being, or is even carried so far in opposition
+as to intend him harm - such is the case in the souls of those gripped by anger.
+[...] Fourthly, whenever it dissimulates, doing or saying anything feigned or
+false. [...] And the end for rational creatures is to follow the reason and the
+rule of that most venerable archetype of a governing state - the Universe.
+{% end %}
+
+Marcus regularly argues to treat these sinners with patience, as they do not
+understand their own actions. This serves mostly as a reminder to himself, and
+he appears to have struggled in applying this throughout his life.
+
+{% quote(source="Book 7, Chapter 26") %}
+When someone does you some wrong, you should consider
+immediately what judgement of good or evil led him to wrong
+you. When you see this, you will pity him, and not feel surprise
+or anger. You yourself either still share his view of good, or
+something like it, in which case you should understand and
+forgive: if, on the other hand, you no longer judge such things
+as either good or evil, it will be the easier for you to be patient
+{% end %}
+
+### Purpose
+
+While Marcus is strongly theistic, and insists in the existence of the gods,
+he doesn't tie purpose to them:
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 9, Chapter 28") %}
+The Whole is either a god - then all is well: or if purposeless - some sort of
+random arrangement of atoms or molecules - you should not be without purpose
+yourself.
+{% end %}
+
+Humans are created for each other, and all inhabit the common _City of Zeus_.
+Their purpose is thus to serve each other, and to contribute to the 'common
+good' of all mankind:
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 6, Chapter 44") %}
+Best for each is what suits his own condition and nature: and my nature is both
+rational and social. As Antoninus, my city and country is Rome: as a human
+being, it is the world. So what benefits these two cities is my only good.
+{% end %}
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 7, Chapter 55") %}
+Every creature must do what follows from its own constitution. The rest of
+creation is constituted to serve rational beings (just as in everything else
+the lower exists for the higher), but rational beings are here to serve each
+other. So the main principle in man's constitution is the social.
+{% end %}
+
+As mankind's purpose is a social one, to separate oneself from society is
+contrary to Nature. The same is true for actively harming each other through
+words or actions.
+
+### Accepting one's own lot
+
+Given Marcus' establishment of a benevolent universal order, he concludes that
+each person's position is as it should be, so one that accepts what life gives
+them is in accordance with Nature:
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 12, Chapter 1") %}
+All that you pray to reach at some point in the circuit of your life can be
+yours now - if you are generous to yourself. That is, if you leave all the past
+behind, entrust the future to Providence, and direct the present solely to
+reverence and justice. To reverence, so that you come to love your given lot: it
+was Nature that brought it to you and you to it.
+{% end %}
+
+Antoninus does not entirely ignore that his own lot in life differs
+significantly from that of others:
+
+{% quote(source="Book 11, Chapter 7") %}
+How clearly it strikes you that there is no other walk of life so conducive to
+the exercise of philosophy as this in which you now find yourself!
+{% end %}
+
+He does also believe that change to the status quo is required, particularly in
+that which contradicts the natural order:
+
+{% quote(source="Book 10, Chapter 9") %}
+Farce, war, frenzy, torpor, slavery! Day by day those sacred doctrines of
+yours will be wiped out, whenever you conceive and admit them untested by
+natural philosophy.
+{% end %}
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 9, Chapter 29") %}
+Don't hope for Plato's Utopian republic, but be content with the smallest step
+forward, and regard even that result as no mean achievement.
+{% end %}
+
+Perhaps his position is that one should accept the lot Nature gives you, but
+should work against the unnatural acts by irrational people contravening the
+Whole?
+
+### Emotional control
+
+As one's emotions inhibits one's rationality, they should be controlled to
+not tarnish the divinity of the directing mind.
+
+Marcus describes some sort of meditation as a method of control over one's mind
+and body:
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 4, Chapter 3.4") %}
+Finally, then, remember this retreat into your own little territory within
+yourself. Above all, no agonies, no tensions. Be your own master, and look at
+things as a man, as a human being, as a citizen, as a mortal creature. And here
+are two of the most immediately useful thoughts you will dip into. First that
+things cannot touch the mind: they are external and inert; anxieties can only
+come from your internal judgement. Second, that all these things you see will
+change almost as you look at them, and then will be no more.
+{% end %}
+
+He also encourages mastery over both pleasure and pain:
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 3, Chapter 4.3") %}
+He responds to the divinity seated within him, and this renders the man
+unsullied by pleasures, unscathed by any pain, untouched by any wrong,
+unconscious of any wickedness; a wrestler for the greatest prize of all, to
+avoid being thrown by any passion [...]
+{% end %}
+
+Pain is something to be borne...
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 7, Chapter 64") %}
+Whenever you suffer pain, have ready to hand the thought that pain is not a
+moral evil and does not harm your governing intelligence: pain can do no damage
+either to its rational or to its social nature.
+{% end %}
+
+While pleasure can draw us in and control us, preventing us from serving the
+Whole:
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 3, Chapter 6.3") %}
+Because it is not right that the rational and social good should be rivalled by
+anything of a different order, for example the praise of the many, or power, or
+wealth, or the enjoyment of pleasure. All these things may seem to suit for a
+little while, but they can suddenly take control and carry you away.
+{% end %}
+
+Marcus applies an analytical reductionism to things in order to control his
+reactions to them. Things that cause pleasure and pain are superficial, and
+breaking them down provides a sober perspective - once these shallow things are
+cast off, one can instead focus on the important.
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 3, Chapter 11.2") %}
+Ask then, what is this which is now making its impression on me? What is it
+composed of? How long in the nature of things will it last? What virtue is
+needed to meet it - gentleness, for example, or courage, truthfulness, loyalty,
+simplicity, self- sufficiency, and so on?
+{% end %}
+
+And he insists that 'all is as thinking makes it so' - the mind's reaction
+produces these emotions, positive and negative. Control over one's thoughts
+provides control over one's feelings.
+
+{% quote(source="Book 12, Chapter 8") %}
+Look at causation stripped bare of its covers; look at the ulterior reference
+of any action. Consider, what is pain? What is pleasure? What is death? What
+is fame? Who is not himself the cause of his own unrest? Reflect how no one is
+hampered by any other; and that all is as thinking makes it so.
+{% end %}
+
+### Life and death
+
+Two recurring themes are the ever-changing nature of the universe, and the idea
+that same sorts of events occur repeatedly in cycles.
+
+Marcus reminds us of the short amount of time we have, highlighting that we
+should endeavour to use it to the best of our abilities - bettering ourselves
+and serving the Whole.
+
+{% quote(source="Extract from Book 2, Chapter 4") %}
+It is high time now for you to understand the universe of which you are a part,
+and the governor of that universe of whom you constitute an emanation: and that
+there is a limit circumscribed to your time - if you do not use it to clear away
+your clouds, it will be gone, and you will be gone, and the opportunity will not
+return.
+{% end %}
+
+On the other hand, the sameness of things appears to provide a comfort when
+considering death, as past a certain point there will be nothing new.
+Death is viewed as part of the natural order of things, and is therefore
+something to be accepted rather than feared: 'it is nothing more than a function
+of nature - and if anyone is frightened of a function of nature, he is a mere
+child' (Book 2, Chapter 12).
+It is also viewed as something of a great equaliser - as all share the same
+fate. Simultaneously, the ever-changing universe will quickly wash away most if
+not all evidence of your life, therefore to be concerned with fame and legacy is
+a foolish waste of time.
+
+{% quote(source="Book 2, Chapter 14.2") %}
+So always remember these two things. First, that all things have been of the
+same kind from everlasting, coming round and round again, and it makes no
+difference whether one will see the same things for a hundred years, or two
+hundred years, or for an infinity of time. Second, that both the longest-lived
+and the earliest to die suffer the same loss. It is only the present moment of
+which either stands to be deprived: and if indeed this is all he has, he cannot
+lose what he does not have.
+{% end %}
+
+## Personal thoughts
+
+### Marcus' misanthropy
+
+It is quite clear that Marcus held some contempt for his peers. Interspersed
+with his regular reminders that 'all men are brothers' and that sinners act out
+of ignorance are vague entries in which he criticises unnamed others:
+
+{% quote(source="Book 4, Chapter 28") %}
+A black character, an effeminate, unbending character, the character of a brute
+or dumb animal: infantile, stupid, fraudulent, coarse, mercenary, despotic.
+{% end %}
+
+{% quote(source="Book 9, Chapter 24") %}
+Children's tantrums and toys, 'tiny spirits carrying corpses' - the Underworld
+in the Odyssey strikes more real!
+{% end %}
+
+The conflicting nature of these entries highlights the difficulties Marcus had
+in practicing his own philosophy - of to loving and living for mankind. The
+regularity in which such passages appear in the _Meditations_ suggest this
+remained a problem throughout his life.
+
+He recommends patience in dealing with 'sinners' and other flawed individuals,
+but also reminds himself that sometimes his judgment maybe incorrect:
+
+{% quote(source="Book 9, Chapter 24") %}
+If he did wrong, the harm is to himself. But perhaps he did not do wrong.
+{% end %}
+
+It's rather interesting to see the combination of self-criticism and criticism
+of others. Marcus appears was fully cognizant of his own failures in adhering to
+his philosophical beliefs, showing some humility in the man who held one of the
+most powerful positions of his time.
+
+### Marcus' obsessive reductionism
+
+While I can respect the criticism of giving in to emotion and allowing it to
+affect your rationality, Marcus occasionally takes this to the extreme.
+
+{% quote(source="Book 9, Chapter 24") %}
+You will think little of the entertainment of song or dance or all-in wrestling
+if you deconstruct the melodic line of a song into its individual notes and ask
+yourself of each of them: 'Is this something that overpowers me?' You will
+recoil from that admission. So too with a comparable analysis of dance by each
+movement and each pose, and the same again with wrestling. Generally, then, with
+the exception of virtue and its workings, remember to go straight to the
+component parts of anything, and through that analysis come to despise the thing
+itself. And the same method should be applied to the whole of life.
+{% end %}
+
+Here he applies his deconstruction to music and similar arts. This absolutism
+strikes me as unhealthy - a balance can be struck between allowing yourself
+enjoyment and indulging in them excessively. I expect most people would struggle
+to maintain such an ideal, and have to wonder how it affected Marcus - whether
+these words were a symptom of his misanthropy or a depression.
+
+Similar deconstruction of sexual matters, combined with his thankfulness at
+having left sex to his later years, marks him as a rather asexual individual.
+This interpretation could be entirely misjudged, considering he had 14 children.
+He doesn't go into much detail when discussing his own sexual activities, but we
+can assume he'd be strongly in favour of controlling one's lust.
+
+### An emperor accepting his own lot
+
+Marcus' arguments for 'accepting one's own lot' didn't sit right with me when
+considering that they were written by an emperor. Certainly his position gave
+him liberties and comforts few others possessed, so it is easy to scoff at
+an emperor telling himself to accept what life has given him.
+
+This emperor, however, seems to regard his royal status with disdain quite often
+\- 'Let nobody any more hear you blaming palace life: don't hear yourself
+blaming it.' (Book 8, Chapter 9). He comments on the conflicts between his
+ideals of virtue and the behaviour commonly attributed to those who have shared
+his station. On the other hand, he also sees that he can exercise his virtues
+particularly effectively in his walk of life (see earlier quotation of Book 11,
+Chapter 7).
+
+Marcus does give the impression of a man striving to be a good king according to
+his own ideals, and shows some vision for a better future. Though he spent most
+of his rule in military campaigns, he apparently spent some of his time dealing
+with legal matters involving freeing slaves and managing guardianship, and
+respected the Senate more than other Roman dictators before and after him.
+
+Perhaps this philosophy is just his version of _Divine Right_, with which he
+justifies his position - Roman emperors were deified after all. Or perhaps that
+is being too harsh, and as Marcus quotes: 'A king's lot: to do good and be
+damned'. Accepting one's lot in life does appear to be a common Stoic teaching,
+so it's not entirely fair to complain of Marcus applying it to his own life.
+
+### Emotions are natural but must be controlled
+
+For someone who worships Nature, arguing for mankind to exert control over their
+emotions strikes me as a strange contradiction. Surely pleasure and pain, which
+are natural and instinctual parts of us, are not inherently bad? The conflict
+here appears to be between nature and rationality, both things which Marcus
+worships in a way. Does the divinity of rationality supersede the divinity of
+Nature? This seems to be an implicit conclusion in his writing. Perhaps the
+justification is that emotions are more animalistic than rationality. Despite
+both having come about naturally, logic developed later as we evolved
+intelligence, so the latter should stay in control.
+
+## Conclusion
+
+The _Meditations_ are a curiosity, but I must admit I didn't find it the most
+pleasant or smoothest of journeys. It took significantly longer to read through
+compared to my average book, and I had to digest it small pieces at a time.
+This may be partly due to the dryness of the subjects - no, I don't read much
+philosophy - but also the nature of a personal journal. Antoninus used his
+writings to convince himself of things, so ideas, arguments, and beliefs
+are repeatedly mentioned and reformulated in different ways. I recommend jumping
+between the translated text and notes to get additional context while the
+chapters are still fresh your mind.
+
+The text doesn't serve as the best introduction into Stoicism - it being the
+opinions of just one man who is considered to be a member of the school of
+thought. A better overview might be gained from a combination of multiple
+perspectives, exploring how Stoicism is applied in practice, how it has
+developed over time. On top of that, the religious flavour Marcus applies in his
+philosophy certainly doesn't suit me.
+
+If you're particularly enamoured with ancient Roman history, you may find it
+interesting to delve into the minds of one of its significant figures. However,
+if you're interested in the emperor recounting and discussing contemporary
+events, you'll be left disappointed.
+
+Some of Marcus Aurelius' ideas are timeless, but you can probably explore them
+better elsewhere.
+
+[^citation]: _Meditations_, Marcus Aurelius, Diskin Clay (Introducer), Martin
+ Hammond (Translator), Penguin Classics, 2006, ISBN 978-0140449334