A great man, by all accounts. I have Meditations on my to-read list, made a small start on it. He's not the most interesting emperor, but that might just be because I don't know him yet; but he makes a good case for most admirable one.
Marcus Aurelius? Yes, the last of the Five Good Emperors (Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurelius himself). Why "good"? Well ...
- Nerva's reign, though short, brought in a partial reconciliation between the army, the senate and the commoners;
- Trajan, by all accounts, was wise and just, personally moral but outwardly generous and fair. His long reign saw the greatest military expansion of the empire, as well as philanthropic works to help the citizens;
- Hadrian's long reign brought in cultural unification and consolidation of the empire;
- Antoninus Pius's reign was peaceful and benevolent, marked by adherence to Roman traditions and institutions, and sharing his power with the Senate.
- Lastly, Marcus Aurelius continued the Antonine legacy, being an unpretentious and gifted administrator and leader. Unfortunately, his reign was also marked by increasing conflict on both the Germanic and Parthian borders, and a devastating plague, which meant he had to devalue the silver Roman
denarius to pay for it all. This may explain his Stoic outlook and the thoughtful, even melancholic tone of his
Meditations.
Aurelius's death and the accession of his son Commodus (featured as the villain in the film "Gladiator") marked the beginning of Rome's descent into decadence and eventual collapse. Of course Commodus didn't do it all himself, and there were some emperors who tried to steady the ship of state; but they were few and far between, and there were all too many emperors who were in it for their own power, glory or greed. Most of them met violent ends.
