Small wonder Commodus turned out so badly

Marcus Aurelius was Roman emperor from AD 161 to AD 180. Edward Gibbon regarded him as the last of the "five good emperors". Marcus was succeeded on the throne by his son Commodus, commonly regarded as a tyrant. Indeed, Commodus was one of the few Roman emperors denied the posthumous honour of deification. It seems the proverb "like father like son" wasn't true in this case.

The primary reason for the good reputation of Marcus Aurelius is his philosophical work "Meditations". It's still considered a classic of world literature. Indeed, Marcus Aurelius is sometimes cast as a philosopher-king, a person who accomplished what Plato assumed was impossible (or at least highly improbable).

In reality, Marcus Aurelius seems to have been a pretty average Roman emperor. He carried out the usual wars against Parthians and Germanic "barbarians", persecuted Christians and even fought a short civil war against an imperial pretender. "Meditations" was written in Carnuntum and close to the river Hron during the Marcomannic wars.

What really struck me when reading "Meditations", however, was the depressive, pessimistic and downright morbid character of the last good emperor's philosophy. How many people who pay tribute to this work have actually read it? Marcus Aurelius sounds like the Buddha on a really bad day! The emperor, of course, was a Stoic. Well, I'm not.

The Stoic philosophy of Marcus claims that everything that happens, including evil and suffering, is for a good cause. Evil and suffering have always existed and will always exist. Fighting it is therefore meaningless. It's part of Nature and probably serves a higher good. (Although Marcus cannot really say what this "higher good" might be.) Soon, we will all be dead anyway, so why bother about evil, suffering and other trifles of life? Life will always be as bad as it is today, so we won't miss anything if we die prematurely. Besides, the dead can't feel anything, so what's the point of fearing death? We either disintegrate into atoms, or are reincarnated in a life similar to this one, or are transformed into something higher. Either way, there is nothing to worry about. At one point, Marcus exclaims that no evil can hurt the community, and since the community cannot be hurt, why should evil bother him?

Because he's emperor...?

Imagine being ruled by an autocrat who believes that he doesn't have to bother about evil in the community!

Naturally, there is an unhealthy ascetic streak in "Meditations" as well. Sex is meaningless, eating good food is like feeding on carrion, even philosophy itself is bad if you indulge yourself too much in it.

True, this Stoic ethos of living your life like an unperturbed marble statue is to some extent mitigated by an emphasis on treating others with love, kindness and justice, including people who don't really deserve it (they just don't know better and should therefore be pitied rather than condemned). This is presumably the part that commends "Meditations" to Christians, who long admired the work.

In general, however, I can't say I was thrilled by "Meditations". Frankly, I stopped reading it after a little over 100 pages. There is something hypocritical about a powerful emperor saying that nothing can be done about our predicament. Nor do I think that a consistent Stoic can become a very likable person. Occasionally, Caesar Marcus Aurelius sounds a bit clinical. He needs to get out more, I think.

I always wondered why the good Marcus Aurelius had such a bad son. I think I finally got it. I mean, it can't be easy having a father who actually believes the contents of his own Stoic meditations.

Small wonder Commodus snapped.