 |
|
| A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z |
Roman Emperor, A.D. 161-180, born atRome, 26 April, 121; died 17 March, 180.
His father died while Marcus was yet a boy, and he wasadopted by his grandfather, Annius Verus. In the first pages of his "Meditations" (I, i-xvii) he has left us an account, unique in antiquity, of hiseducation by near relatives and by tutors of distinction; diligence, gratitude and hardiness seem to have been its chief characteristics. From his earliest years he enjoyed the friendship and patronage of theEmperor Hadrian, who bestowed on him thehonour of the equestrian order when he was only six years old, made him a member of the Salianpriesthood at eight, and compelledAntoninus Pius immediately after his own adoption to adopt as sons and heirs both the young Marcus and CeioniusCommodus, known later as the Emperor Lucius Verus. Inhonour of his adopted father he changed his name from M. Julius Aurelius Verus to M. Aurelius Antoninus. By the will ofHadrian he espoused Faustina, the daughter ofAntoninus Pius. He was raised to the consularship in 140, and in 147 received the "tribunician power".
In all the later years of the life ofAntoninus Pius, Marcus was his constant companion and adviser. On the death of the former (7 March, 161) Marcus was immediately acknowledged as emperor by the Senate. Acting entirely on his own initiative he at once promoted his adopted brother Lucius Verus to the position of colleague, with equalrights as emperor.
With the accession of Marcus, the greatPax Romana that made the era of the Antonines thehappiest in the annals ofRome, and perhaps ofmankind, came to an end, and with his reign the glory of the oldRome vanished. Younger peoples, untainted by the vices of civilization, and knowing nothing of the inanition which comes from over-refinement and over-indulgence, were preparing to struggle for the lead in the direction of human destiny. Marcus was scarcely seated on the throne when the Picts commenced to threaten in Britain the recently erected Wall ofAntoninus. The Chatti and Chauci attempted to cross the Rhine and the upper reaches of the Danube. These attacks were easily repelled.
Not so with the outbreak in the Orient, which commenced in 161 and did not cease until 166. The destruction of an entire legion (XXIIDeiotariana) at Elegeia aroused the emperors to the gravity of the situation. Lucius Verus took the command of the troops in 162 and, through the valor and skill of his lieutenants in awar known officially as theBellum Armeniacum el Parthicum, waged over the wide area ofSyria, Cappadocia,Armenia, Mesopotamia, andMedia, was able to celebrate a glorious triumph in 166. For a people so long accustomed to peace as the Romans were, thiswar was wellnigh fatal. It taxed all their resources, and the withdrawal of the legions from the Danubian frontier gave an opportunity to the Teutonic tribes to penetrate into the rich and tempting territory. People with strange-sounding names — the Marcomanni, Varistae, Hermanduri, Quadis, Suevi, Jazyges,Vandals — collected along the Danube, crossed the frontiers, and became the advance-guard of the great migration known as the "Wandering of the Nations", which four centuries later culminated in the overthrow of the Western Empire. Thewar against these invaders commenced in 167, and in a short time had assumed such threatening proportions as to demand the presence of both emperors at the front.
Lucius Verus died in 169, and Marcus was left to carry on thewar alone. His difficulties were immeasurably increased by the devastation wrought by the plague carried westward by the returning legions of Verus, by famine and earthquakes, and by inundations which destroyed the vast granaries ofRome and their contents. In the panic and terror caused by these events the people resorted to the extremes ofsuperstition to win back the favour of thedeities through whoseanger it was believed these visitations were inflicted. Strange rites of expiation andsacrifice were resorted to, victims were slain by thousands, and the assistance of the gods of the Orient sought for as well as that of the gods ofRome.
During thewar with the Quadi in 174 there took place the famous incident of theThundering Legion (Legio Fulminatrix, Fulminea, Fulminata) which has been acause of frequent controversy betweenChristian andnon-Christian writers. The Roman army was surrounded by enemies with no chance of escape, when a storm burst. The rain poured down in refreshing showers on the Romans, while the enemy were scattered with lightning and hail. The parched and famishing Romans received the saving drops first on their faces and parched throats, and afterwards in their helmets and shields, to refresh their horses. Marcus obtained a glorious victory as a result of this extraordinary event, and his enemies were hopelessly overthrown.
That such an event did really happen is attested both bypagan andChristian writers. The former attribute the occurrence either to magic (Dion Cassius, LXXI, 8-10) or to theprayers of the emperor (Capitolinus, "Vita Marci", XXIV; Themistius, "Orat. XV ad Theod"; Claudian, "De Sext. Cons. Hon.", V, 340 sqq.; "Sibyl. Orac.", ed. Alezandre, XII, 196 sqq. Cf. Bellori, "La Colonne Antonine", andEckhel, "Doctrina Nummorum", III, 64). TheChristian writers attributed the fact to theprayers of theChristians who were in the army (Claudius Apollinaris inEusebius,Church History V.5;Tertullian, "Apol.", v; ad Seap. c. iv), and soon there grew up a legend to the effect that in consequence of thismiracle the emperor put a stop to thepersecution of theChristians (cf. Euseb. and Tert. opp cit.). It must be conceded that the testimony of Claudius Apollinaris (see Smith and Wace, "Dict. of Christ. Biogr.", I, 132-133) is the most valuable of all that we possess, as he wrote within a few years of the event, and that all credit must be given to theprayers of theChristians, though it does not necessarily follow that we should accept the elaborate detail of the story as given byTertullian and later writers [Allard, op. cit. infra, pp. 377, 378; Renan, "Marc-Aurèle" (6th ed., Pari, 1891), XVII, pp. 273-278; P. de Smedt, "Principes de la critique hist." (1883) p. 133].
The last years of the reign of Marcus were saddened by the appearance of a usurper, Avidius Cassius, in the Orient, and by the consciousness that the empire was to fall into unworthy hands when his sonCommodus should come to the throne. Marcus died at Vindobona orSirmium in Pannonia. The chief authorities for his life are Julius Capitolinus, "Vita Marci Antonini Philosophi" (SS. Hist. Aug. IV); Dion Cassius, "Epitome of Xiphilinos"; Herodian; Fronto, "Epistolae" and Aulus Gellius "Noctes Atticae".
Marcus Aurelius was one of the best men ofheathen antiquity. Apropos of the Antonines the judiciousMontesquieu says that, if we set aside for a moment the contemplation of theChristian verities, we can not read the life of this emperor without a softening feeling of emotion. Niebuhr calls him the noblest character of his time, and M. Martha, the historian of the Romanmoralists, says that in Marcus Aurelius "the philosophy ofHeathendom grows less proud, draws nearer to aChristianity which it ignored or which it despised, and is ready to fling itself into the arms of theUnknown God." On the other hand, the warm eulogies which many writers have heaped on Marcus Aurelius as a ruler and as a man seem excessive and overdrawn. It istrue that the most marked trait in his character was his devotion tophilosophy and letters, but it was a curse tomankind that "he was aStoic first and then a ruler". His dilettanteism rendered him utterly unfitted for the practical affairs of a large empire in a time of stress. He was more concerned with realizing in his own life (to say thetruth, a stainless one) theStoic ideal of perfection, than he was with the pressingduties of his office.
Philosophy became a disease in his mind and cut him off from thetruths of practical life. He was steeped in the grossestsuperstition; he surrounded himself with charlatans and magicians, and took with seriousness even the knavery ofAlexander of Abonoteichos. The highest offices in the empire were sometimes conferred on his philosophic teachers, whose lectures he attended even after he became emperor. In the midst of the Parthianwar he found time to keep a kind of private diary, his famous "Meditations", or twelve short books of detached thoughts and sentences in which he gave over to posterity the results of a rigorous self-examination. With the exception of a few letters discovered among the works of Fronto (M. Corn. Frontonis Reliquiae, Berlin, 1816) this history of his inner life is the only work which we have from his pen. The style is utterly without merit and distinction, apparently a matter ofpride for he tells us he had learned to abstain from rhetoric, and poetry, and fine writing. Though aStoic deeply rooted in the principles developed by Seneca and Epictetus, Aurelius cannot be said to have any consistent system ofphilosophy. It might be said, perhaps, injustice to this "seeker after righteousness", that his faults were the faults of his philosophy rooted in the principle thathumannature naturally inclined towardsevil and needed to be constantly kept in check. Only once does he refer toChristianity (Medit., XI, iii), a spiritual regenerative force that was visibly increasing its activity, and then only to brand theChristians with the reproach of obstinacy (parataxis), the highest social crime in the eyes of Roman authority. He seems also (ibid.) to look onChristian martyrdom as devoid of the serenity and calm that should accompany the death of the wise man. For the possible relations of the emperor withChristian bishops see A H, andM S.
In his dealings with theChristians Marcus Aurelius went a step farther than any of his predecessors. Throughout the reigns ofTrajan,Hadrian, andAntoninus Pius, the procedure followed by Roman authorities in their treatment of theChristians was that outlined inTrajan'srescript to Pliny, by which it was ordered that theChristians should not be sought out; if brought before the courts, legalproof of their guilt should be forthcoming. [For the much-disputedrescript "Ad conventum Asiae" (Eusebius,Church History IV.13), seeA P]. It is clear that during the reign of Aurelius the comparative leniency of the legislation ofTrajan gave way to a more severe temper. InSouthern Gaul, at least, an imperial rescript inaugurated an entirely new and much more violent era ofpersecution (Eusebius,Church History V.1.45). InAsia Minor and inSyria the blood ofChristians flowed in torrents (Allard, op. cit. infra. pp. 375, 376, 388, 389). In general the recrudescence ofpersecution seems to have come immediately through the local action of the provincial governors impelled by the insane outcries of terrified and demoralized city mobs. If any general imperial edict was issued, it has not survived. It seems more probable that the "new decrees" mentioned byEusebius (Church History IV.21.5) were local ordinances of municipal authorities or provincial governors; as to the emperor, he maintained against theChristians the existing legislation, though it has been argued that the imperial edict (Digests XLVIII, xxix, 30) against those who terrify bysuperstition "the fickle minds of men" was directed against theChristiansociety. Duchesne says (Hist. Ancienne de l'Église, Paris, 1906 p. 210) that for such obscuresects the emperor would not condescend to interfere with thelaws of the empire. It is clear, however, from the scattered references in contemporary writings (Celsus inOrigen,Against Celsus VIII; Melito, in Eusebius,Church History IV.26;Athenagoras,A Plea for the Christians 1) that throughout the empire an active pursuit of theChristians was now undertaken. In order to encourage their numerous enemies, the ban was raised from thedelatores, or "denouncers", and they were promised rewards for all cases of successful conviction. The impulse given by thislegislation to an unrelenting pursuit of the followers ofChrist rendered their condition so precarious that many changes inecclesiastical organization and discipline date, at least in embryo, from this reign.
Another significant fact, pointing to the growing numbers and influence of theChristians, and the increasing distrust on the part of the imperial authorities and the cultured classes, is that an active literary propaganda, emanating from the imperial surrounding, was commenced at this period. TheCynicphilosopherCrescens took part in a public disputation withSt. Justin inRome. Fronto, the precepter and bosom friend of Marcus Aurelius, denounced the followers of the new religion in a formal discourse (Min. Felix, "Octavius", cc. ix, xxxi) and the satirist Lucian ofSamosata turned the shafts of his wit against them, as a party ofignorant fanatics. No betterproof the tone of the period and of the widespreadknowledge ofChristianbeliefs and practices which prevailed among thepagans is needed than the contemporary "True Word" ofCelsus (seeO), a work in which were collected all thecalumnies ofpagan malice and all the arguments, set forth with the skill of the trained rhetorician, which the philosophy and experience of thepagan world could muster against the new creed. The earnestness and frequency with which theChristians replied to these assaults by theapologetic works (seeA,M F,T A) addressed directly to the emperors themselves, or to the people at large, show how keenly alive they were to the dangers arising from these literary or academic foes.
From such and so many causes it is not surprising thatChristian blood flowed freely in all parts of the empire. The excited populace saw in the misery and bloodshed of the period aproof that the gods were angered by the toleration accorded to theChristians, consequently, they threw on the latter all blame for the incredible public calamities. Whether it was famine or pestilence, drought or floods, the cry was the same (Tertullian, "Apologeticum", V, xli):Christianos ad leonem (Throw theChristians to the lion). The pages of the Apologists show how frequently theChristians were condemned and what penalties they had to endure, and these vague and general references are confirmed by some contemporary "Acta" of unquestionable authority, in which the harrowing scenes are described in all their gruesome details. Among them are the "Acta" ofJustin and his companions who suffered atRome (c. 165), of Carpus, Papylus, and Agathonica, who wereput to death inAsia Minor, of theScillitan Martyrs in Numidia, and the touching Letters of the Churches ofLyons and Vienne (Eusebius,Church History V.1-4) in which is contained the description of the tortures inflicted (177) onBlandina and her companions atLyons. Incidentally, this document throws much light on the character and extent of thepersecution of theChristians inSouthern Gaul, and on the share of the emperor therein.
APA citation.Healy, P.(1907).Marcus Aurelius Antoninus. InThe Catholic Encyclopedia.New York: Robert Appleton Company.http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02109a.htm
MLA citation.Healy, Patrick."Marcus Aurelius Antoninus."The Catholic Encyclopedia.Vol. 2.New York: Robert Appleton Company,1907.<http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/02109a.htm>.
Transcription.This article was transcribed for New Advent by Joseph P. Thomas.
Ecclesiastical approbation.Nihil Obstat. 1907. Remy Lafort, S.T.D., Censor.Imprimatur. +John M. Farley, Archbishop of New York.
Contact information. The editor of New Advent is Kevin Knight. My email address is webmasterat newadvent.org. Regrettably, I can't reply to every letter, but I greatly appreciate your feedback — especially notifications about typographical errors and inappropriate ads.