I get he was one of the greatest Roman Emperors in history, but did he really have to be a Debbie Downer?
>>286148
That bust isn't even of Aurelius.
>>286148
It's not easy being the Emperor, especially if you try to be a good man as well.
>>286990
All I know that about the man in OP is the disdain for plebs meme. Who is he?
>Marcus Aurelious
>the greatest Roman Emperors
If there is one person responsible for eventual fall of Roman Empire in the West it would be him for being stupid enough to letting his son to inherit the Empire and not adopting some pinnacle of virtue and learned philosopher like himself. I mean, it was well established practice by the time, he could made it into a law or something. Or maybe, I say maybe, he could actually educate his son for the first place. Philosopher on a throne my ass.
>>289011
Read 'Meditations'
He was a great emperor but also wrote a journal where he laid out his philosophy. It's a lot about self-improvement and he really only wrote it for himself but it was kept and saved for posterity.
>>289018
Without blood succession you're just asking for more civil strife. If any general can just say he's a better emperor then you and then have precedent to take over, you've destined your empire to fail. It took the Romans centuries to learn this lesson, and it was only ever at peace during dynastic rule. Marcus Aurelius knew this, and though he knew his son was not 'ideal' he hoped that he could at least maintain until he gave an heir which, hopefully, was more like his grandfather.
>>289022
oh, I know who Marcus Aurelius is. I've read Meditations. The first post in the thread said that the bust wasn't of Aurelius and I was wondering who the bust was then, because it looks a lot like this guy.
>>289022
Do you know a lot about stoicism though? Care to name any other good stoic works? I'm at a place in life where I could use some good stoic virtue.
>>289033
It's Antoninus Pius.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoninus_Pius
>>289038
'The Obstacle Is the Way' is probably the best book for modern stoics.
>>289038
Letters from a Stoic is essential reading.
>>289032
>If any general can just say he's a better emperor then you and then have precedent to take over
This is why you appoint your heirs beforehand, preferably by adopting them. It worked so well for a century by this time. He could even appoint someone as a co-ruler to his son, like he was to Lucius Verus.
>>289059
>Lucius Verus
>drunk wastrel and sex fiend
>good co-ruler
Anon..
>>289059
Suppose a leader died in battle without appointing an heir, in times of unanticipated conflict.
The entire empire would crumble. At least with the hereditary succession they could trace the next of kin.
>>289072
I meant his son, like Verus, needed another "Marcus Aurelius" to actually rule.
>>289038
>Do you know a lot about stoicism though? Care to name any other good stoic works? I'm at a place in life where I could use some good stoic virtue.
The Discourses of Epictetus are the best work when it comes to stoicism.
Marcus Aurelius is more famous than he is because he was a Roman Emperor. As a philosopher, Epictetus was better. If you get a necromancer and revive Marcus Aurelius, he will say the same thing and tell you to read the Discourses.
>>289086
This is why the first thing new ruler should do is to appoint a reasonable heir.
>At least with the hereditary succession they could trace the next of kin.
Even if the next of kin is some 15yo Syrian dickgirl?
>>286148
>I get he was one of the greatest Roman Emperors in history, but did he really have to be a Debbie Downer?
His philosophy is actually the best way to be happy.
What he means in that text is: "Don't strive for fame and recognition". This is a good rule if you want to be happy.
>>289018
The others adopted their heirs because they were gay and had no male children reaching adulthood.
Marcus Aurelius had no choice, in this case. He had a healthy male heir, he had to be his successor.
>>289120
>"Don't strive for fame and recongition"
Easy for an emperor to say.
>>289120
>>286148
He's not a debbie downer; I agree. Towards the beginning he talks about how the past and future are just ideas in the mind, and how the only reality in this world is the present moment. So whether one lives to be 30 or 30,000, you only ever stand to lose the present. Now you can disagree about his thoughts on the future and past, but following this philosophy with a focus on your present has definitely made me happier.
>>289112
Not appointing your kid as your heir is asking for a civil war.
>>289136
Why do you say so?
>>289112
Suppose the heir dies as well as the leader. What then? So many times in history do people assassinate the heir apparent and usurp the throne.
>>289156
He already had fame and recognition by virtue of his position. He never had to earn it.
>>289120
>His philosophy is actually the best way to be happy.
>What he means in that text is: "Don't strive for fame and recognition". This is a good rule if you want to be happy.
But that's impossible. We're all programmed to want to be the "best." If we instead strive to become an average Joe, our body produces anxiety (despite our reasoning).
>>289196
What a young patrician who sees only a corrupt Republic standing in his way?
>>289157
Roman Empire was still de jure Republic by that time, he could try to reestablish the importance of senate, with emperors being elected by it or something (like they did several times later). My point is, it was still try-and-error period for Imperial Constitution, he could get away with some serious reforms, it wasn't all put in stone yet. Maybe it's too much to ask from him, but at least he could recognize the fact his son is unfit for rule and do something about it before he went to fight germans.
>>289196
Also, many who already have fame and recognition dread at the thought of losing it.
>>289226
