Marcus Aurelius and the Later Stoics - College of Stoic Philosophers

<THEBY QUPHANTVice -Principal

THE WORLD S EPOCH-MAKERSEDITED BYOLIPHANT SMEATONMarcus Aureliusand the Later StOlCSBy F. W. Bussell, D.D.

PREVIOUS VOLUMES IN THIS SERIES:CRANMER AND THE ENGLISH REFORMATION.BY A. D. INNES, M.A.WESLEY AND METHODISM.By F. J. SNELL, M.A.LUTHER AND THE GERMAN REFORMATION.By Principal T.M. LINDSAY, D.D.BUDDHA AND BUDDHISM.By ARTHUR LILLIE.WILLIAM HERSCHEL AND HIS WORK.By JAMES SIME,M.A., F.R.S.E.FRANCIS AND DOMINIC.By Prof. T. HERKLESS, D.D.SAVONAROLA.By Rev. G. M HARDY, D.D.ANSELM AND HIS WORK.By Rev. A. C. WELCH, M.A., B.D.MUHAMMAD AND HIS POWER.By P.DE LACY JOHNSTONE, M.A.(Oxon.).ORIGEN AND GREEK PATRISTIC THEOLOGY.By Rev.WILLIAM FAIRWEATHER, M.A.THE MEDICI AND THE ITALIAN RENAISSANCE.By OLIPHANT SMEATON, M.A.PLATO.By Prof. D. G. RITCHIE, M.A., LL.D.PASCAL AND THE PORT ROYALISTS.By WILLIAM CLARK, LL.D., D.C.L.EUCLID : HIS LIFE AND SYSTEM.By THOMAS SMITH, D.D., LL.D.HEGEL AND HEGELIANISM.By R. MACKINTOSH, D.D.DAVID HUME AND HIS INFLUENCE ON PHILOSOPHYAND THEOLOGY. By Prof. JAMES ORR, M.A., D.D.ROUSSEAU AND NATURALISM IN LIFE AND THOUGHT.By Prof. W. H. HUDSON, M.A.DESCARTES, SPINOZA, AND THE NEW PHILOSOPHY.By Principal IVERACH, D.D.SOCRATES.By Rev. J. H. FORBES, M.A.WYCLIFFE AND THE LOLLARDS.By Rev. J. C. CARRICK, B.D.INFLUENCE ON RELIGIOUS LIFE AND THOUGHT. By C. SAROLEA, Ph.D.,Litt.Doc.CARDINAL NEWMAN AND HIS

THE WORLD S EPOCH-MAKERSMarcus Aurelius,and theLaterIStoicsF: W: Bussell, D.D.Vice-Principal of ^Btasenose College : OxfordoI. q.Edinburgh. T. & T. Clark1910

$2$JJlifcv^~-J/lsp SI j //

VIRI AMABILIS ET DESIDERATISSIMIA. H. J. GREENIDGEMANIBUS,QUI ME AMIGA NIAD HOC OPUS CURANDUMIMPULIT,ETINDUSTRIE SILEINENARRABILIS EXEMPLOEX DESIDIA EXCITAVIT

PRINTED BYMORRISON AND GIBB LIMITED,FORT. & T. CLARK, EDINBURGH.LONDON : S1MPKIN, MARSHALL, HAMILTON, KENT, AND CO. LIMITED.NEW YORK I CHARLES SCRIBNER S SONS.

THIS little look will betray the length of time it hasbeen under consideration ly several allusions to modernevents which are now anachronisms. But I have preferredto leave the text as I wrote it some time ago ;and to makeno change in the estimate of the Stoic teachers, although insome respects my own standpointis not the same. On thewhole, it agrees fairly ivell with the valuation of a pureMonism set forth in the Bampton Lectures of 1905 ;and I am glad of an opportunity of supplementing andsupporting the general statements made there ly thisdetailed inquiry into two or three of the most eminent andsincere expounders of an untenable creed.MUNDHAM HOUSE,NORFOLK,December 1909.

C> Providence""GENERAL SYNOPSISPAGEGENERAL PREFACE . vPART I. INTRODUCTION.....CHAP.I. "The Roman Emperor" 1II. "The Stoic Philosopher". . . . .18III. Development of PHILOSOPHY in Rome .35. .51IV. "The Wise Man" ......PART II.THE IMMEDIATE INFLUENCEI. EPICTETTJS, or the New Cynism ;Devotional Personificationof the Cosmic Order . . . . .76A. The RELIGIOUS transformation of PHILOSOPHIC Dogma 76B. The Gift of Free......Will; the Fatherhood of God ;theDivinity of Souls; the Cosmopolis the; SpecialFunction 82extending to Particulars ; Discipline of theSons of God .. . . . .93II. The Wise Man in the Two Commonwealths ; Opportunism,or the role of Contemplation and Passivity . . 97A. Modern Conception of Stoicism in error ;the essentialExpediency of Resignation and Abstention .97.B. Close Restriction......of the Sphere of Missionary Influence ;Rejection of Civic or Domestic Duties by the trueAnchorites 104C. The Sage Spectator rather than Agent in the Universe 107ix

"xGENERAL SYNOPSISCHAP.PAGBIII. The Ultimate Problems . . . . .110A. Death and Immortality. . . .110B. Some Minor Points; the "Pax Romana;theWorld of Conflict ;the Moralistic Standpoint ;the"Noeric" Life of God ; Futility of mere TechnicalEmancipation, etc. . . . . .117N 0. Harmony between Epictetus and Marcus Aurelius . 120PART III.THE CREED OF MARCUS AURELIUSANTONINUSI. The Teaching of the Emperor ;the Nature of Man theAgent. . . . . .122A. Chief Characteristics of his Meditations due to hisOffice and his Time . . . . .122B. Influence of the Conception of A(tyos on Greek Thought 1320. The Constitution and Psychology of the Individual . 136D. Man s Function and Place in the World ; SpecialEquipment of each being a Key to its purpose and. . . . .Happiness .147II. Man and the World . . . . .152A. The two Commonwealths and the Citizen, as Agentor . .Quietist...... . . .152B. The Problem of "Conformity to Nature"; varyingDefinitions of Qfois 158C. Inherent Diversity of the Nature of Man and theWorld . . . . . .167III. Absolute Subjectivity. .....175A. Complete Isolation of the Individual from Things andfrom his Fellow-men . . . . .175B. Moral Effort expires in Tolerance of Evil . .181C. Soul, without real Contact with Things-in-Themselves,can assimilate and transmute into Material for itsown Nurture . . . . . .186IV. Happiness and Destiny of Man s Spirit. . . 194A, Self-sufficingness of the Soul . 194

Z>."GENERAL SYNOPSISxiCHAP.PAGEB. Mystical Tendencies and the Doctrine of "Deitywithin" . . . . . .202C. The Problem of Monopsychism. . . 204D. Immortality. . . . .-. 206E. Belief in Immortality essential to the logical Theory,if not to the Pursuit, of . .Morality .217Appendix A, B, C . . . . . .220V. The Universe, Eternal and Divine, and Transient andContemptible.. . . . .225A. The Perpetual Flux and Monotony of the Worldprocess......225B. Creation and Providence, how far Intelligible? . 235VI. The Alleged Conciliation of the Two Natures . .241A. Vanity and Insignificance of Human Life in theB.Measureless Gulf of Time...... . . .241The Uses and Methods of Philosophy the SURRENDER;of Intellectualism 250C. "ScientificStudy as a Meditation on Death . . 255On Rebellion and Apostasis from the "World-orderHow far possible? . . . . .262272GENERAL CONCLUSION ......APPENDIXTranslation of Passages cited from Epictetus. . . 288

""MARCUS AURELIUS AND THELATER STOICISMPART I.INTRODUCTIONCHAPTER I"THEROMAN EMPEROR"ANALYSIS1. The Roman Empire an extempore expedient.2. The Emperor a Republican official, not a King ;no recognitionof the hereditary principle.3. The Empire above Nationality.4. Vagueness of Imperial ideal allowed oscillation between civiland military conception; the Ccesar represented the Spiritof the Age in his choice.5. Dual aspect of the Emperor as Overlord of the provinces""""(where his personal caprice modified by continuity of tradition,by policy of non-intervention, and by local autonomy} ; andas Princeps and Delegate of the Senate.6. Honest attempts of Five good Emperors to rule as Presidentsof a Free State (96-180 A.D.); history of its subsequentfailure (180-285 A.D.).7. This period an exceptional epoch, devoted to the problem of theReconciliation of the Dyarchy.8. Disappointing results of M. Aurelius 1 reign and character dueIin part to the sadness of his philosophical speculations.

"""2 MARCUS AURELIUSNo political system that man s ingenuityhas inventedcan ever equal in interest for us the Roman Empire.Like the British Constitution, it was the slow growthof time. Julius and Augustus contributed, in largemeasure and in answer to a tired world s demand, tothis unification, this centralizing of authority in asingle city and a single ruler ;but they could neverhave dreamt of the full significance of their work.Augustus, indeed, to the very close of his life cloakedhis power under a pretence of extempore expediency ;and masterly though this policy was in disarming theold classical prejudice against atyranny," yet muchof the suspicion and discord, the mutinies and bloodshed,which succeeded, was due to the singular indefinitenessand ambiguity of his new Constitution, which underthe old titles and magistracies concealed a completerevolution. He could never have foreseen that thishasty attempt to reconcile the traditions of the pastwith the needs of the present, would become permanentin his own Empire, and, after it had passed away, wouldappear at all subsequent times of human history as thevisionary Ideal towards which the aspirations of ourrace are directed. The paradoxes, but imperfectly disguised by the Imperial mantle, involved inconsistenciesso absurd and so fundamental, that we wonder how thesystem survived for ten years the inquiry of reasonablemen. Yet a stability seems to have attended it, whichfrom experience we know is denied to the paperconstitution and definite formulae of modern theoreticgovernment.2. The Roman Empire was never a monarchy inthe strict sense ;to the very end the word Respublicatook precedence of the title of fhe despot, who con-

"""""""THE ROMAN EMPEROR" 3trolled and frequently enslaved it. In spite of theImperial apotheosis (little understood, and often misappreciated),in spite of the obscure inviolability of theTribunitian power, no special sanctity surrounded therepresentative of the people. Thea nation," vaguename sometimes embodied in the Senate, sometimesin the tumultuous shouts of frontier legions, was thereal and ultimate repositary of all lawful power and we;marvel that in all the patient and accurate legislationof the Imperial epoch no attempt was made to definewith exactness the duties, the prerogatives, the rightsof succession, the dynastic claims, the methods ofelection, of that central point uponwhich this wheelof government and society revolved. The divinity,which to our modern eyes doth hedge a theking,"peculiar respect in speech and address, the reverenceto the person of a monarch, the accumulated titles ofhonour, all these were utterly lacking. We haveenormously increased the prestige, the sacrosanctcharacter of our modern sovereigns, thoughitmaybe at the cost of their prerogative. Their influenceis all the greater, because it is indirect. The Caesar,elected by a free choice, and possessing of himself nosingle claim to sovereignty, was the trusted ministerof Democracy, and atoned for failure with his life.The King can do no wrong Le roi est mort !;Vive le roi ! are two principles which lie at the background of the stability of Europe, and are by no meansmere sentiments or convenient fictions of the law.Yet they involve ideas which a Roman in the mostwith scorn. Weservile period would have repudiatedhave raised monarchs above the strife of party, abovethe bitterness of rival factions, into a serener atmosphere ;

"""""4 MARCUS AURELIUSand when the history of the Nineteenth Centuryiscompiled by dispassionate critics, it will be seen howlargely we have augmented the influence while circumscribing the direct powerof the Crown. As late asthe reign of Maurice (582602), Theophylact couldproudly boast of the contrast between the and"legalconstitutional governmentof the Byzantine, and thecapricious despotism of the irresponsible Chosroes.And this, after the policy of the rough but astuteDiocletian, of Constantine, and still more definitelyof Justinian, had set itself to centralize, to seclude, toconsecrate the monarchical idea, after the pattern ofOriental courts. Nor did the hereditary principle meetwith recognition throughout this periodcenturies. Nothingof fifteenis more remarkable than the safesecurity of the family and relations of a deposed ormurdered emperor. They sank unnoticed into privatelife ;no vengeance associated them in the misdeeds oftheir kinsman ;no discontented faction saw a pretextfor sedition in their indisputable claims to Imperialrank. If we examine the dynasties of this periodfrom Augustus to Constantine xiv., we shall observehow common was the peaceful succession of son, ofbrother, or of nephew to the throne ;and the page ofhistory is full of ephemeral families, each one increasingin duration and stability, till at the close, the Comneniand the Palseologi divide between them nearly fourhundred years. But it must be continually rememberedthat this involved no recognition whatever of the hereditary principle, as we understand it to-day. The HolyRoman Empire became monopolized by a single familyin later times, without ever expressly denying that thehighest secular office in Europe was open to any

"""""""THE ROMAN EMPEROR" 5and free-born Christian man. From one briefbaptizedbut pregnant sentence in Tacitus we gather the remarkable difference between the aristocratic modern worldof to-day and the democracy of the classical peoples :reges ex nobilitate, duces ex virtute sumunt (Grermania,vii.).This is the key not only to mediaeval, but evento much of modern history. We account in this wayfor the long survival of effete dynasties, and the realbusiness of affairs concentred in some MajorA Domus."similar respect produced in Japan the singulardualism of Shogun and Mikado ;and in Eoman historyitself we may see it appearing in the last daysof theWestern Sovereignty, when powerful barbarians likeBicimer, dividing the honour and the reality of authority,introduced a principle utterly alien to the spirit of theRomans. But it is not too much to say that to theacute observer, who refuses to be deceived by the harmless and necessary turmoil of democratic legislationand reform, European Society, in its firm loyalty tornonarchs who are born not made," to a governingclass that is never a bureaucracy, and to the laws ofsuccession and property, relies for its surest foundationson the hereditary principle. And this, just because thepeople are free, and with their instinctive good senseprefer to place power in those whose past traditionsare a guarantee of confidence and good faith, and whobreathe a purer air of patriotism and disinterestedness,apart from the narrow conservatism of officialdom andthe intrigues of professional politicians.3. To-day, though humaner views of the brotherhood of man prevail, and are destined to triumph overwar and the miseries of dissension, yet there is no signof the decay of National feeling. For this becomes

""""""6 MARCUS AURELIUSstronger in our hearts, as it is more genuine than avague cosmopolitan sympathy, which so often amountsmerely to the acceptance of certain theoretical propositions, indifference to immediate duties. To thisfeeling, this generous emotion, the Empire, whethermediaeval or ancient, was an absolute stranger. TheEmpire was the denial of nationality. The CivisKomanus was one who enjoyed a supra-nationalprivilege. He was a Spaniard, a Neapolitan, a Cyrenian,a Syrian ;but he was something more. The gradualbe termed the franchiseextension of what mayadvanced to its goal of complete comprehensiveness(under an Antonine, in 213 A.D.) along with the decayof the Eoman race. In its narrower significance, theRoman family became extinct. The legitimate childrenby birth were succeeded by the adopted family of allnations under heaven and; adoption constituted inthe ancient world a tie no less sacred and bindingthan did physical descent. Thus the Empireis completely ignorant of the modern notions of kingship,of heredity, of nationality. It attempts to conceal theabsolute powers which it places in the hands ofrepresentatives, and seems ashamed or afraid to definethem. The Emperorismerely the first subject of thiscomprehensive and invisible State. He embodies thepeople s wishes, aspirations, and authority ;but heexercises a sacred trust which has been freely delegatedto a chief magistrate. He is a steward, not an owner.In the son of Caesar there exists no inherent presupposition or pretension to office. And the politicalsystem founded on the very negation of nationalism orseparateness, formed a bond of union between tribesand civilizations the most adverse and distinct, an

""""""""THE ROMAN EMPEROR" 7intangible network which held together in harmonyand peace the last centuries of the decaying peoples ofclassical antiquity.4.Enough has been said to suffice as a generalintroduction to that Imperium of which MarcusAurelius Antoninus was so bright an ornament. Weshall try to portray the work, the character, theinfluence of this ruler ;and in attempting to estimatehis place, either as a thinker or a governor, the remarkswhich precede will be found by no means superfluous.Among the various attempts made by generals orstatesmen on their accession to define this strangelyvague dignity, none was more noble or conscientiousthan the policy of the five good Emperors whose nameshave brightened that period of repose, and perhaps oflethargy, which seemed to Gibbon the happiest agein human records. The reigning Caesar, finding fewprecedents and generally armed with a mandate,"silent or expressed, to reverse and stigmatize hispredecessor s methods, was at liberty to give prominenceto whichever of his dual positions he preferred. Hemight, even in time of peace, incline towards anAbsolutism supported by the Sword ; or, rejecting thetitle Irnperator, he might live and govern as princeps,"as primus inter pares," among his peers, the Senatorialfathers. In this oscillation, greatly though this changewas due to the character of the Emperor and hispredilections for republican or military ideals, yetthere can be no doubt that in whatever capacity, herepresented the temperof the Roman world thatpublic opinion and that plainspokenness of the populacewhich was tolerated even under the most savage reigns.Probably no government has ever existed unless favoured

""8 MARCUS AURELIUSand approved by the larger part of its subjects. Theseditious may be clear-voiced and bold, but they alwaysconstitute a minority. The approval of the citizensmaybe due to the sheer inertia of indolence orignorance, or the profound doubt that any change canbe for the better. An infinitesimal fraction of theEussians have more than once imperilled a systemwhich is set firm on the piety and veneration of thevast bulk of the nation. The Sultan of Turkey, inspite of the protests of aYoung Turkeyfaction, isacceptable to his subjects. The government of France,which offers a frivolous nation the comparatively harmlesssport of a ministerial crisis in place of regicide and thefall of dynasties, reposes undoubtedly upon the negativeand contemptuous consent of the people. The TudorSovereigns, perhaps more cruel in their suspicions ofour noble houses than any Caesar, had the unfailingsupport of their subjects, and live in their gratefulmemory. Similarly, the Eoman Emperors seem at eachmoment to embody the dominant spirit of the age, andperhaps rather to follow than to lead. Trained for themost part in no princely seclusion, but moving freelyas soldiers or citizens among a free-speaking people,acceding to a dignity which rarely dazzled them, theybrought to the throne the tastes, the studies, the predilections of a private station ;and gave unconsciousexpression to the popular voice, and clearer utteranceto vague murmurs of discontent.5. Great as was the power of Caesar, his personalitywas perhaps of less account than the character of theConstitutional monarch of to-day. The provinces ofEome, where the real life and progress of the Empirecontinued, were indifferent to the occupant of the throne.

"""THE ROMAN EMPEROR" 9the Roman civil serviceThough never degenerated intoa bureaucracy, yet there was a continuity of tradition, auniformity of procedure, which never snapt, though theidea of sovereignty was incarnate in a rough Dacianpeasant or an effeminate Syrian boy ; thoughfrontiers the transient phantoms in the purpleon thebaffle theassiduity of Numismatics. The secret of Roman greatness was her respect for individual rights and localautonomy. The central government was to be strongand vigilant for the public cause, but it was to honourthe liberties of the governed, and above all never tointerfere in those debatable and uncertain matters which,as indifferent to the public order, are best left to individual taste. The New Testament from Pilate toFestus is full of eloquent testimony to the forbearanceand toleration of the Roman official, and his instinctivesense of the limits of government and the restrictionswhich should be placed upon State interference. Rome,unfairly weighted with the odium of the Ten Persecutions of the Christians, isyet the first State that discovered and practised religious tolerance. The ear ofthe Emperor was an infallible and uncorrupt court offinal appeal ;but his vigilance did not obtrude itself, nordid his authority mischievously supersedethe ancientlocal systems.Seneca (De Clem.) is addressing his master during thegolden age of the Quinquennium ; yet these wordsmight well epitomize the general view of Romanadministration duringits whole supremacy.I. 2 : "Multaillos cogunt ad hanc confessionem (esse felices), quanulla in homine tardior est ;securitas alta, affluens ;jus supra omneni injuriam positum.. . . Lsetissimaforma RP*, cui ad surnmam libertatern nihil deest nisi

"""ioMARCUS AURELIUSpereundi And licentia." of the conception of the Imperial positionI. 3 :;quern omnes non tarn supra seesse quam pro se sciunt : and the familiar metaphor,Quemadm. totum corpus animo deservit. . . . Sic hsecimmensa multitude unius animse circumdata (envelopinglike the body the soul of a single man) illius spirituregitur,illius ratione flectitur. ... 4. Ille est enimvinculum per quod EP. cohseret ;ille spiritus vitalis,quem hsec tot millia trahunt, nihil ipsa perse futuranisi onus et prseda si mens ilia Imperii subtrahatur.5. Animus EP 08 tu es, ilia corpustuum." The wholetemper of the more acquiescent Eoman and the attitudeof the provincials towards the new regimen,isprobablywell contained in the following:Ep. Ixxiii. : "sincerus ac purus qui reliquitIlle viret curiam et forum etomnem admin em EP 06 ut ad ampliora secederet, diligiteos per quos hoc ei facere tuto licet . . .magnam remnescientibus debet . . . sub quorum tutela positus exercetartes bonas."If the wisdom of the British is content to leave theand distinctanomaly of over six hundred separateadministrations in India, we have learned this lessonfrom the Eoman. The Eoman world was no loosely-knitcongeries of independent satrapies behind the apparent:licence of the urban life of Asia Minor was the stronghand of the central authority, watchful yet seldomobtrusive. The supreme merit of the system was dueto this self-control, which for the first time in historycurbed and restricted the interference of government,encouraged native traditions and creeds, and avoidedthat dangerous lethargy which a professional bureaucracyand over-minute supervision tend to produce in somemodern States. Thus the Empire clearly had two faces,

"""""""THE ROMAN EMPEROR" nlike Janus, the one as the benevolent and impartialwarden of the world s peace ;the other, in its stricterrelation to its immediate environment, the Senate ofRome. The Emperor was the overlord of a multiplicity of States, who found union symbolized andguaranteed in his person but he; was, besides, thesupreme magistrate in a municipality. The individualityof Caesar mattered little in the provinces but his;momentary temper was all-important in Rome. WhileTacitus devotes almost exclusive attention to theseditions of terrified Senators, who might thwart butcould scarcely help Caesar s Imperial ideas ;while Suetonius interests his readers in the petty and maliciousgossip of the Court, we must look elsewhere forthe real effect of the new system, and explain fromother sources the gratitude and the homage which itcalled forth.6. We have said that the Prince could on hisaccession emphasize at his will the civil or the militaryside of sovereignty and that in ; making this choice herepresented more truly than an heir-apparent to-daythe general wish or public sentiment. The advent ofVespasian and the Flavian dynasty was in completeharmony with middle-class feeling. Peace, retrenchment, and reform was the watchword of a tired societyafter the startling extravagance and heroic vices of theClaudian house. Unfortunate misunderstanding drovethe last of this family, an able administrator of a gloomyand suspicious temper, into that undying feud with theSenate which Tacitus so eloquently describes in theopening chapters of the The tone of Roman"Agricola."society and aspirations in 96 A.D. became once moreovertly and distinctly Republican. The period of nearly

"""""12 MARCUS AURELIUSone hundred years was marked by an honest attempt onthe part of the adoptive Emperors to govern as Presidentsof a free State. Trajan managed to hold in solutionthe diverse elements of military enterprise and deferenceto the consultative Body, which still remained in namethe fount of honour," and the source of the delegatedauthority which he exercised, whether in camp or court.Hadrian, who represents the restless Wanderjahre inthis epoch s life, had reason to suspect the loyalty ofthe Senate, but he rarely disregarded their dignity.Antoninus the First, one of those tranquil, artless, andalmost saintly characters that raise to the throne thedomestic virtues, and influence not by ability, but bypure simplicity of life and aim, continued in his eventless reign the same policy of modesty and deference.Antoninus the Second (or Marcus Aurelius), in whom theperiod closes not without sad and melancholy forebodingof a lonely old age, was fully persuaded of the ultimateauthority of the Senate, though he must have confessedto himself that as an engine of government it was supineand incapable. With his death and the ominous (perhaps apocryphal) threat to Comrnodus, The Senatesends you this "ended the dream of reconciliation!between the two disparate members of the Dyarchy.The African Dynasty of Severus (bearing in the character,members so strange a resemannals, and fortunes of itsblance to the Flavian) broke entirely with this tradition ;and the counsel, Gain the Army and despise all else,"became the charter of his successors. The apparentrestoration under Severus n. was formal and ineffective.The senatorial nominees, Pupienus and Balbinus orTacitus some forty years later were scarcely fittedto the requirements of the time. The offer of ^Emilianus

"""""THE ROMAN EMPEROR" 13to limit the powers of the Emperor to external policyand the guardianship of the frontier, must have beentheelection placardof an insecure candidate ratherthan the mature judgmentof an unquestioned ruler ;and the revolutions of Diocletian and his successorsrecognised and sanctioned a state of affairs already existing, rather than dealt the blow or decreed the downfallof the Senate. Rome was seen to be what it had longbecome, a provincial city, governed by a municipal bodywhose traditions were splendid, but whose influence wascontemptible. The capital, in the turbulence and external menace of the third century, had ceased to bethe centre of interest and activity, or the pivot ofgovernment. The powers of the Csesar, or of his subordinate lieutenants, gained in theory as in practice, thegreater the interval which separated them from thecapital. Rome was rather the seat of the oppositionthan the centre of administration. The new residenceschosen for the members ofthe Caesarian College seemedto imply a widespread consciousness of danger impendingfrom the North, and an almost prophetic sense of asacred mission, as sentinel of Europe against Asiaticperils.7. Thus it must be readily conceded that the secondAntonine belonged to an epoch altogether exceptionalin the records of Imperial Rome. The Dyarchy (asit is sometimes called) was a deliberate attempt to severand yet to conciliate the two provinces of civil-legaland military administration. No doubt in the mind ofJEmilian (253 A.D.) dwelt a vague reminiscence of thisfortunate era.Only then was the theoretical truth ofthe Constitution recognized by the Senatorial representative, namely, that in that body reposed the ultimate

""14 MARCUS AURELIUSauthority of the Eoman 1people and that the jEmperorswere but the chosen executive or delegates to carryout their will during their good pleasure. The twoAntonines were ideal representatives of this anomaloussystem, which sought to veil autocracy under republicanforms in exact contradiction of the modern scheme,which expresses in despoticformulas the limited orvicarious action of a constitutional monarch. In boththere is a deception which deceives no one ;but wemay well consider whether Bolingbroke is right, whomaintains that disguised absolutism veiled under popularforms is more dangerous than the openexercise ofpower, without any pretence of concealment. Broughtup from early years in the atmosphere of a Court, thesecond Antonine had avoided many of its temptationsand learnt much of its responsibilities. The peculiardanger of one born in the purple (TropfapoyevvrjTos),which seems the clear lesson of the career of Commodus,is contradicted (like most historic generalisations) bythe example of his father. The filial regard of Aureliusfor Antoninus (to call them by their familiar titles) wassincere and unaffected. He succeeded, firstamong theEmperors, not only to a throne secured by a profoundloyalty, but to duties already well defined ;and he wasspared, by pious glances at his model, much uncertaintyin the conduct of affairs, that uncertainty as to thesignificance and limits of power which embittered thecharacter of Tiberius, and sowed the seeds of incurablehatred in so many promising reigns between the assemblyand the executive, their chosen but distrusted representative. His reign was distinguished by no great ad-1As later, in the College of Cardinals, the inherent right of all Christians to choose the Supreme Pontiff.

"""THE ROMAN EMPEROR" 15ministrative reform, no eventful campaigns. His warswere confined to the frontiers of the Augustan Empire,which Trajan had vainly attempted to enlarge ;andinterest us only because they seem to forebode the greatBarbarian movements of the coming centuries. Theabsolute stillness which enfolds the reign of Antoninusis certainly broken under his successor bythe din ofarms and the alarms of sedition. Avidius Cassius isthe already familiar type of ambitious provincial governorwho instigates a military pronunciamento but he;may interest us as showing that Aurelius failed to securethe allegiance of the troops, while he failed to rouse newlife and energy in the Senate. The desultory and futilecampaign in Persia (with which this mutiny was connected) merely marks the recrudescence of that eternalquarrel between East and West which in this form lastedfor seven hundred years, and produced in all that timeno lasting alteration of frontier. In internal policy Imust not forget the beneficial legislation fortKe~weakerpart of the community, which, derived from no classicalideal, depended upon a mixture of humanitarian Stoicism \and unseen Christian influences ;and to both these the /wRoman mind was peculiarly susceptible. But we maylook in vain for any important contribution to the fabricof the Roman Imperial system ; and, while respecting j^the principle of heredity, we must regret that Aureliuscould not have foreseen the abuse of power in unworthyhands, and have rendered harmless the uncontrolledcaprice of later times.8. Marcus Aurelius has thus certainly left no permanent mark upon the development of the Imperialideal. His influence upon his successors was slight.The tranquil figure of Antoninus exercised a far more

""16 MARCUS AURELIUSpotent fascination and a ; shadowy Dynasty of affectionate respect issued from him, ending in disgrace inHeliogabalus, who may be reckoned the eighth who bore,and perhaps the third who sullied, that honourable name.Julian,in hisCaesars," treats him with astonishingirony, and seems to forget that the imperial Stoic is the1model for the imperial Cynic. Among his own friends,within his own family, we must regret the little weightwhich his character or his teaching carried. 2Somethingin his nature disqualified the noblest of Romans, thevery pattern of sovereigns, from impressing the age withthe permanent stamp of his influence. If we wish toappreciate this failure aright, we must turn from thepublic duties of the Emperor to the inner soul of theman, which lies bared before us in his Meditations."There, self-revealed, as perhapsin the case of no othermonarch, 3 we have the record of his life and spiritualconflict.It is when we pass to the philosophic opinionsof Aurelius that we meet some partial explanation forhis failure as a monarch or a reformer. We shall haveto review the various stages by which Philosophy, thatdangerous and seductive foe of the Common Life, penetrated the Roman mind, and attempted to pervadeRoman society. In the Quietisrn, which the Stoicsbrought with them from the East, we shall discover1Sextus Aurelius, it is true, speaks in his customary terms of vapideulogy, here, perhaps, with greater genuineness.2Mr. Pater, who has, if we may hazard a guess, produced with anunerring and inimitable instinct the peculiar of the"atmosphere"Antoninian age, represents the secret doubts and amusement of theEmperor s audience, when he lectured to them on the Stoic philosophy.3 I except the naive and creditable autobiography of the Mogul conqueror Babar whose; example the present Amir of Afghanistan and theGaekwar of Baroda would seem to emulate.

"THE ROMAN EMPEROR" 17the most satisfactory clue to the sadness of the Imperialspeculator, to the unwilling disappointment which hiswritings and his life must finally arouse in all thosewho love him for his unselfish devotion, his goodness ofheart, his unaffected sincerity.

"uCHAPTER IITHE STOIC PHILOSOPHER"ANALYSIS1. Greek Philosophy (in the sphere of conduct) is foreign in itsorigin, and abstentionist ; aims at discovering a Law or aUnity beyond conventional Sanctions and the City -State.2. Classical Greek temper delights in variety ;but Greek Thoughtdesires a Unity, which as beyond the Multiple, becomes pureNegation.3. Philosophical Quietism in contrast to vigorous democratic life.4. Disappointment of the Sage who in the supposed new domain ofFreedom encounters resistance and incalculable forces.5. A Practicalachieved in the political world by AlexUnity"ander and by Augustus; Roman aristocrats,condemned toidleness and introspection by the new government, join theparty of abstention and indifference.6. Their "Supreme Unity," at first Fate or Destiny, and implyingfutility of endeavour, becomes a religion of devotional yetdespairing Theism.7. Roman Philosophy as Syncretist and Eclectic; with littleemphasis on Absolute Truth, and much on casuistry and individual needs ; the dogmatic materialist becomes an agnosticand a mystic.8. Chieffeatures of the eclectic writers in the first two centuries,Christian and Pagan.% 9. Concentration on the Inner Life as the sole reality.10. Stoical doctrine transformed according to personal character ofits chief Roman exponents, Seneca, Epictetus, and MarcusAurelius.1. GREEK Philosophy cannot be called a nativeproduct of Greek soil, or a spontaneous and original18

"THE STOIC PHILOSOPHER" 19creation of the Greek mind. It sprang up in thosefringesof Hellenic civilization which bordered thebarbarian peoples, whether in Thrace, in Italy, in Sicily,or in Asia Minor. Obscure and alien influences combined to give it that peculiar complexion which it boreto the end of its history. Vague hints and dark legendsconnect every prominent sage with a visit to Egypt, anda fabled intercourse with the priests of an esotericreligion. In Greece proper we meet with the latethough splendid names of Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle ;but the earliest discoverers and the later successors ofthe Golden and Athenian age were foreigners. Thewhole tone and temper of speculation from first to lastis sharply contrasted with those features of Greek socialand political life which are most familiar to us. Fromthe outset this stream of thoughtran counter to theclassical instincts, and to the needs and aspirations ofHellenic life and culture. The Athenian period, markedby a bold attemptto unite the two unsociable sides(" principatum ac libertatem "), ended, nevertheless, inthe complete disclosure of their final incompatibility.Philosophy in its birth is essentially Eomantic ;andsubjective impressions take the place of exterior law.True it is that the very aim of Eeflexion is to justify andexplain this outer law to the subject, and to acceptvoluntarily speculations which had been imposed beforeupon slaves. For by the intrinsic nature of Keason orDialectic, separatist yet unifier, all these reach aunity in the world of nature and of thought, by a comparison of the various organs of intelligence or a moreor less patient scrutiny of physical processes ; by asifting away of the nondescript, the particular, untilthe pure but rarefied form appeared ; by overcoming

20 MARCUS AURELIUSthe extravagant conceit of individual thinkers or impressionists, in a discovery rational unanimity.of a fixed norm of all2. But it is instructive to trace in history thefailure of all such attempts to arrive at a unity ofconciliation between the universal and the individualreason. Difference (so dear to the Greek spirit, sodistasteful to its mature reflexion) obtruded itself inevery sphere, where a final harmony was promised ;and the unity, if and when attained, proved to bevoid of content, for the supreme Eeality was indistinguishable from negation. This search, which is thenecessary function of unifying reason, was pursued withquiet persistency, until we lose sight of Hellenic sobrietyand orderliness in the raptures and ecstasies of thebastard Platonism. Reflexion, in its earliest stirringsdue to barbarian influences, suggested unity as the fittinggoal for human thought and endeavour ;while theGreek temper delighted in variety, whether in art, orpoetry, or politics a; variety which was not mere disorderly licence or caprice, which in the end knewno other restraints but those of native good taste andgood feeling. In the sage, the two conflicting tendencies constantly confront one another no less than insociety and the; peace of mind of the one is sacrificedno less than the harmony of the other. The wholeessence of the creative and progressive Hellenic life wasliberty and equality. In the commonwealth of City-States (I do not speak here of the monastic rigour ofthe Dorians and a common worship), loosely unitedby a traditional ancestry, and in the ordinarylife ofany one of the group, whether colony or metropolis,variegation was the chief characteristic. It was signi-

"""THE STOIC PHILOSOPHER" 21ficant that they chose to find in an artistic sense oflimit the real controlling force behind the multiple ofturbulent society ;which other nations are compelled torealize and arm in the full panoply of mail, or incarnatein a final appeal to some despotic monarch. In thefree, unimpeded interaction of independent units, theGreek State found a wholesome social life, free alikefrom the lethargy of servile decay and from subversiveanarchy. But it must be observed that this recognitionof law depended on no written constitution, but on theunwritten law(a<ypa<j>os VO/JLOS) of custom and precedent,and in the last resort could be defended by no peremptory sanction. Similarly, Greek morals, whetherin the unreflecting or self-conscious days, based theirappeal upon a sense of personal dignity and freedom,and were controlled in outline and direction by aestheticpropriety (as among the Eomans in later times by aconventional decorum). The JToXt?, in the strictlylimited number of free families and individuals, encouraged a hasty yet regular exchange of authority andobedience ;and could rely upon a willing deference tothis law of give-and-take which was certainly unable(as republics always are) to enforce itself against acalculating tyrant. The citizens were satisfied with thegeneral stability, and yetfelt how little sacrifice ofcaprice, how brief a delay to legitimate ambition, such aconstitution demanded.3. Not among such happy and independent mindsdid the problem of the universe press, urging for solution. Engrossed as they were in the unceasing andmultifarious duties of their civic life, they had neitherleisure nor opportunity for speculation. The shadowof despotism, whether the inordinate powerof the

22 MARCUS AURELIUS"man of the hour" in Greek tyrannies, or thecolossal figure of the Persian King, must fall withsombre influence over these blithe and prosperous communities, before men can sit apart to muse on the substance of all things, the futility of existence, and thenegative ethic of abstention and of quietism. It wouldbe interesting (though here out of place) to trace theshare which this consciousness ofan unholy or a lawfulunity exercised in the production of the reflecting habitamong the Greeks. Certain it is that this thought, noless than the spectacle of factious democracy, largelycontributed to the development of philosophy which;from the first set itself to correct, to deride, or to supersede, by some deeper explanation than unconsciousuniversal consent, the conventional fabric of society andof government. This feud, once started, was never againhealed, and the practical outcome on the cities of theHellenic world of so much meditation and dispute, maybe confined to the aristocratic communities of Pythagorasand the personal influence of Socrates ;whose life as anobedient citizen, whose death as a martyr to truth andto patriotic duty, served only to emphasize the morevividly the discord of the two spheres. The reason forthis distrust and suspicion is not far to seek. Thedesire for a personal and individual apprehension oftruth, apart from the sacred ministrations and mediationof the Family-State, seemed as impious to their eyesas the claim to immediate revelation by Protestantor Mystic, to the devout Catholic to-day. The conservatism of unreflecting obedience (whether in a tyrantor in an Aristophanes) waged a truceless warfare againstthe seekers after a higher sanction. The religious,whose belief was limited to poetic tradition, whose

"THE STOIC PHILOSOPHER" 23practice was bounded by the ceremonies and festivals ofthe State s authorization, saw nothing but impiety inthe deeper scrutiny, which refused to acquiesce in thedivinity of the obvious, and attempted to bring someconcord into the turbulence of Olympus. The practicalmen of business and affairs viewed with grave disapprobation the withdrawal of so many hours of acitizen s life into the meditative idleness or querulousdisputes of the sage s leisure. Even the popularridicule or dislike betrayed on numberless petty occasionsthe uneasy sense of the community that Philosophy wasthe chief enemy of social life that the calm and im;partial discussion of those self-evident axioms on whicha State is founded, must in the end prove a scepticalsolvent, fatal to all law and principle, whether of lovein the family, of devotion to the commonwealth, orrespect for the divine beings whose worship the Stateenjoined. This was not an evanescent prejudice of theHellenic mind, which disappeared after a proper familiarity with true wisdom. It was an age-long temper,which never wavered in its distrust ;until indeed philosophy, in the inactively tolerant and pacific period ofthe Eoman Empire, became a mere synonym for abrilliant ability in extempore harangues, or an antiquarian and comparative study of the dogmatic tenetsof the schools. In the age of the Antonines the fourprincipal sects could exist together on amicable terms,and enjoy the Imperial liberality without disgracingsuch bounty by their quarrels. For by that time thepretentious claim of Philosophy to guide human lifehad in effect yielded to the more modest and indirect,but genuine and effectual, direction of Konie. But inits earlier days Philosophy was in continual opposition

24 MARCUS AURELIUSto the Hellenic and classical spirit. Arising in foreignsoil and under alien influences, it demanded an exclusiveallegiance to a code above the current conceptions ofduty ;and it tended, under cover of practical maxims,to withdraw the student from effort or endeavour into alife of contemplation and inactivity. 14. Above all, Philosophy, while ittaughtthe selfsufficiencyof the wise man and promised him liberty toexpatiate in a larger sphere than the State, yet intruth only deprived him of the innocent excitement anduseful duties of social routine, and enslaved him to themore comprehensive unity which it professed to discover. In effect he became the sport of natural forces,or the organ of impersonal reason, or the citizen of asupposed kingdom ofthe universe, a cosmopolitan, withill-defined and often purely negative duties. Leavingthe sole realm where human virtue can be efficient,andcan, even in failure, look forward to future progress orreform with unselfish joy, the sage found himself inthe presence of forces which he could not control orindeed understand.In seeking freedom in the develop-1The irony of the whole Stoic position isadmirably but unconsciously"displayed by Seneca, Tranq. Animi, 1 :Sequor Zenonem CleanthemChrysippum ; quorum tamen nemo ad Ilempublicam accessit, nemo nonmisit. De Otio vel Secessu. 30. Duse maxime in hac re dissidentSectse, Epic, et Stoicorum sed ; utraque ad otium diversa vid mittit.Epicurus ait non accedet ad RP. Sapiens nisi si quid intervenerit.:Zeno ait : Accedet ad RP. nisi si quid impedierit. Alter otium ex propositopetit, alter ex causa. Causa autem ilia late patet Si RP.;corruptior est . . . si occupata est malis ;non nitetur Sapiens in supervacuum,nee se nihil profuturus impendit."32. "Nos certesumus quidicimus et Zenonem et Chrysippum majoraegisse quam si duxissent exercitus, gessissent honores, leges tulissentquas non uni civitati sed toti humano generi And tulere." throughoutthe little treatise, in dividing life s possible aims into voluptas, conio,it is clear where his real sympathies are.

""The"THE STOIC PHILOSOPHER" 25ment of his personality, he only learnt that freedomand personality are alike illusions. Philosophy, althoughit has often proved a noble ally,is in some sort aprotest against the finality of domestic and social life.It charms man with hopes of a higher companionship,which, alas in the end are to be reached only by laying!down what is distinctively human in the philosopher,by abandoning what is especially his own, in the ecstasyof the Divine Unio."5. Historically, the Union, the higher world whichthey sought for, was the achievement of Alexander forone brilliant moment, and of Eome perhaps for all time,whether as a secular or a spiritual monarchy.Kendall (ch. iv., Ixxxv.):conquests of Alexanderchanged the moral as well as the political outlook of Hellenism ;for, ethically as well as socially, it became impossible anylonger to regard the TroXtg as the supreme unit of morality."The undoubted decline of democratic zest at the entrance ofthe twentieth century may be attributed, partly,to the discovery that social problems and inequalities are independentof the suffrage and representative institutions ; partly, and ingreat measure, to that Imperialism which expatiates in a largerworld, and unconsciously relaxes the tension of mind into civicduties, and consoles the poor and oppressed for present miseryby a hallucination of foreign power. I cannot here refrainfrom the pleasure of quoting this sentence, Ixxxviii. : "AsStoicism sprang historically out of the suppression of GreekCity-States by the expansion of Greece into the world-empireof Alexander; so, too, its second birth in Italy heralds theImperial stage in the destinies of the great republic." ThoughKoman Stoicism adopted or simulated an attitude of systematicdefiance to this system, we may note that in modern timesHegelianism is allied with recognition of Divine right andpassive obedience; and to-day the quiescence of anything

"26 MARCUS AURELIUSmayapproaching educated republicanism be attributed to theprevalence of a similar outlook on the world.Again, cxxxvii. : "The Stoic philosopher, proclaiming themoral autonomy of the individual, disclaimed the strictlypolitical bond and sanction to found morality upon bases thatwere universal. The civic obligation in its narrower application was annulled, and superseded by the Cosmic ;but thename and association of f citizenship were too deeply graftedinto moral consciousness to be killed out. They survivedinto the idea of aworld-citizenship.And Rome especially was not disposed to regard thetranscendent promises either of sage or Christian, exceptas violations of the compact which united the governorsand the governed. The classical Roman spirit, averseto individualism, had long and stubbornly opposed theintroduction of Philosophy and strange rites. It wasalmost an irony that drove the Republican senators ofthe early Imperial age to seek solace in those theorieswhich their ancestors and models had relentlessly expelled. The pursuits of wisdom, in much accountablefor the decay of population and the old vigorous urbanlife, now defied the political system which it bad calledforth. The Empire was the natural result of individualism and of disintegration: it could tolerate diversity,because it transcended and controlled it. It providedthese aristocratic sages of the opposition with a conspicuous theatre for their noble, if ineffectual, defiance ;and they forgot that its removal would leave themwithout occupation, in tbe midst of a surfeited democracy, who hated and despised them. It is impossibleto refuse our admiration to the heroes and martyrs inthe cause of the Republic;ethical equipment, the negativebut the thinness of theircharacter of their

"""THE STOIC PHILOSOPHER" 27maxims, must prevent us from regretting their failure.There is no happiness in the world without endeavour,without practical work.It was the merit of the Eomanto be happy only in working, and he exchanged hisspear for the plough after the annual campaign. Idleness settled down on Italy after the extinction of theyeoman class and free labour ; and, in spite of Vergiland Columella, the recreations of the aristocratic Eomanin the Imperial era ceased to be rural, as their chiefbusiness ceased to be military.An unhappy accidentor want of straightforwardnessprevented the nobles from acceptingin the new constitutionoffice under onewho was but a member of their own order, a delegateof their own body one who stood in an exalted;positionindeed, but well within the reach of envy, a penaltyfrom which the limited sovereign of modern times isexempt, from the very magnificence and uniqueness ofhis dignity. Jealousy excluded them from responsibleand important posts ;and an enforced leisure mightvary with the voluptuous or austere, in the pursuit ofstrange pleasures ofsense and ear, or in the defiant, yetnegative, courage of a Stoical philosophy.6. The peculiar form which the Unity of thecommon search took in these philosophers was Fate.Quietistic as all Greek schools tended to become (banishing practice with the Buddhist as disease), nonepreached more assiduously the futility of human effortthan the Stoics. An irresistible current of Destiny(which united all events and effects in an unbrokenthe universe as an unceasing process, always inseries) ;motion, yet never progressing; the vanity of earthlypursuits, and a studied contempt of human ambition ;the sense of Eternity, present here and now, final and

""28 MARCUS AURELIUSfixed, with no hope for a brighter dawn;a resoluteindifference to human history, except to point the moralof the emptiness of our wishes, and the final equality ofall things and all men, good or bad, of all striving, aswell as all inaction ;the conscience, or inner voice, as asingle stable point in the flux of sense and matter, yetwithout practical value, seemingly an aimless penaltyof a jealous (or a suffering ?) god, who gives as thatcruel gift, a part of himself, the power to survey andto mourn the misery of life without the power tochange practical duties of life, slipping one by one;from the grasp of the sage, until his moral life can besummed up in a perpetual non possumus: such arethe chief tenets of the later Stoicism, and such admirablysuited the melancholy temper of Roman abstentionists.The earlier school (though possibly tinged with a latentPhenician gloom) had been indistinguishable fromCynicism, save in the logical completeness of its systemof defence, and in a metaphysical dogmatic, to whichAntisthenes had wisely remained a stranger. Nopractical effort marked the earlier founders, whose solebusiness was to weld into a solid and coherent body,guarded by unassailable argument, a certain theory ofthe world. Only when domiciled in Rome did theSchool mix in actual life, and become not a sect, but aThe practical bent of the Roman mind transreligion.formed the Stoa from a mere house of dogmatic paradoxinto a temple of a devout, though despairing, Theism.7. Though negation passivity is the keynote ofthe Romans a kindStoical Ethics, yet this takes amongof positive character and their inertness is one of;dormant energy. But this entirely depends upon thepersonal and individual bias of the various exponents ;

"""THE STOIC PHILOSOPHER" 29and on the common influence of the Roman Empire,whichappeared to tolerate, nay, to invite, criticism andreflexion, while it seemed to close so many avenues towholesome effort. Never slaves to a system, alwaysplacing practical value above logical symmetry, theRoman philosophers were all eclectic. They followedwith no servile adherence to a master s word, but composed, as it were, a rosary from many Schools, to fitthe urgent needs of their existence. To the presentmoment, orthodoxy is the supreme merit of EasternChurchmen, as heresyis the most heinous sin. Tothe Western Catholic everythingis subordinate toutility and the honour of the Church or the welfare ofsouls : salvation is to be found only in communion withRome is the un;and schism, or visible disaffection,pardonable offence. The Eastern is rather a member ofa spiritual realm of truth, the Western a citizen of avisible kingdom. The rules of the former are ascertained by the pure Reason (or communicated instantaneously by heavenly Grace). They are definite,unalterable, and unchanging. But an earthly Statedemands certain concessions to the individual, politicreservation of the whole truth, materializing of dogma,casuistry in the treatment of special events, and opportunism in the attitude of the spiritual to the secularpowers.8. This distinction prevailed also in the philosophyof Greek and Roman. Among the latter there are nopure or unmixed schools. Seneca tempers the rigourof the early dogmatism by the maxims of Epicurus andthe sentimental dualism of Plato. Epictetus, anotherSocrates, transforms into a loving Father the ultimateand irresoluble physical force that lies behind the vain

"""30 MARCUS AURELIUSshadow, Sansara, of existence, and colours with personalpiety the Buddhistic atheism of the academic Stoics.Plutarch, who has much in common with this School, isyet, in ultimate metaphysics, a Dualist, and in practicallife an admirer and (so far as the times allowed) anemulator of the simple and cheerful virtue of theancients. Marcus Aurelius, the last of the Stoics, is, atthe same time, the first of the Neo-Platonists, and inhis doctrine of the deity within transforms a merephysical connexion of the soul and the upper air into amystical creed that was the very bulwark and support of the brighter side, the southern front,"of hisMeditations. Clement of Alexandria (if by the inclusion of this name Imay complete the list) adaptsthe Stoic precision of formula and definition to thegrowing science of Christian Ethics, which, issuing fromthe pure passivity of the Millenarian or the patientsufferer for truth s sake, was destined, with its newinterest in social life, to re-create society in Europe. Toresume : the victims of the Imperial regime gladlywelcomed a somewhat frigid school as having an implicitpower of sustenance and consolation in critical times.Yet within this loose network they borrowed frommany sources ; they laid no claim to completeness orconsistency. For the mainspring of their studies wasnot intellectual curiosity, or the desire of applause, orthe tranquil discovery and enjoyment of eternal verities.In the decay or syncretism of various popular cults, inthe congregation of the most varied nationalities undera single sway, in the blurring of all distinct outline,once separating the petty gods from the great andsingle Source of Life, in the gradual closing to thenobles of the arena of practical ambition under a

"""THE STOIC PHILOSOPHER" 31socialist monarchy which dispensed with their services,we may see the chief causes of this passionate devotion to Stoicism, and this gradual transformation of acommonplace scheme of materialism into one of thenoblest, if the most melancholy, of all religions.Whereall separateness of feature, all idiosyncrasy, had fadedinto a world-empire, where all individual effort orsignificance tended to disappear in a universal law,the sage meditating profoundly on the unity of Beingand the nexus of events, the eternity of type and thetriviality of the fleeting particular, could only find consolation in Mysticism, none the less real because it wasnot explicit.9. Stoicism preaches, as we have seen, the ethicsof abstention. Centring all attention on the inner lifeof the individual, like all the subjective schools of thepost-Aristotelian age, it speedily despaired of finding atrue sphere for his activity, and gradually withdrew itsclaims to occupy or to direct any portion of human life.The universal order and unity (so strangely contrastedwith Epicurean pluralism) could be approached only byunselfishness that devotion to a; purely typical (nota personal) excellence which characterizes all Greekthought in the field of morals. The single free andperpetually repellent point of consciousness, the will (towhich alone any value could be attached), was to beoccupied in a meaningless conflict with natural emotion,and in lofty disdain of the outer world of nature orsociety. While the theoretical creed of the Stoic or theCynic proudly pronounced its text to be a reasonablefollowing of Nature, an insistence on the unity, harmony,and order in the world, and a belief in a common humanbrotherhood predominating above petty national or class

32 MARCUS AURELIUSdistinctions, the School not only ended in setting thesage in isolation from a world of fate or chance, andfrom his fellows, but tortured him with a sense ofdualism and unceasing conflict within the limits of hisown nature. It was impossible to regard the world asa field for moral discipline and trial (for the conceptionof Stoic immortality compels us to pronounce itsasceticism either impious or superfluous), nor, again, asadvance for the human racea scene of perpetualtowards a distant goal which; belief, cold comfortthough it be, may indeed sustain pilgrims in their ownunsteady and failing footsteps. Neither was it a vainshow, the uneasy dreams of some sleeping God : atheory which may amuse a pessimist speculator, andreconcile him to the indifference of sensations (or, indeed, of hopes), which, after all, are not really his.10. It is difficult to say what the Stoic universemeant for the wise man. Its motive, its author, itsgoal were alike undiscoverable and the;kindly thoughts,the noble sentiment of duty, the compassionate unselfishness of so many of the School, were held as a legacy ofsome primitive religious teaching, some illogicalremnantof personal temperament, in spite of the negative dogmaof their philosophic creed. Personal distinction, earnestness of aim, and devotion to a set purpose, have consecrated the names of Seneca, Epictetus, and Aurelius.But this influence depends, not on their close adherenceto a logical system, but in the original sincerity of theirsentiments, in their pure and genuine characters. Underthem, the School loses all its distinctive features, itsmoral harshness, its dogmatism. A gentle melancholyof doubt, and a delicate and refined consideration forothers, take the place of the certainty and the austerity

"""THE STOIC PHILOSOPHER" 33of the elders. The Koman character, tempered by thatadmixture with Spanish influences which marks the firstcentury, both in politics and in letters, becomes mysticaland feminine. Only from the older school is maintainedthat barren article of faith which isthe doom of humanin Stoic, in Mahometan, in Brahmineffort or enterprisethe divine Unity. Utterly unable toqualifydescribe this original and comprehensive Being, rejectingthe earlier physical interpretation, and straining on thepath of negative theology towards a purely spiritualconception, they did, indeed, succeed in establishing averbal kinship between the soul and its maker, onegleam of consolation in an alien world but in so;doing,they abandoned the chief tenet of their nominal system,and prepared the way for that final leap into sentimentand emotion in which Greek philosophy was destined toperish. A like fate probably awaits all Schools whichstart from an assumption of original Unity. Stoicismis but one of many which end in a complete reversalof their most fundamental axioms. Monism has passedinto the harshest Dualism ;Pantheism into an impossibletranscendence ; sternness, certainty, and effort intodoubt, compassion, and resignation. If Aurelius demands our sympathy and our praise in his unselfishefforts for the security of the Empire,it is because hispractice is better than his creed ;because he has supplanted the fate of positivism by a distant Providence,to whom he stretches out pure hands, full of mute butunavailing appeal. But he is . _th J&st j?f J^O-niaa-Stoics ;he founds no School. Eational thought is swept awayby a torrent of Oriental mysticism or ceremonial and;even while we read his private memoirs the emptygarments of a formal Stoicism fall away to disclose a3or

34 MARCUS AURELIUSsoul glowing with an emotion midwaybetween compassion and love, and stirred to an activity (whichhis creed belied), if not by enthusiasm, at least by astrong sense of loyalty and duty. Our task will leadus to examine in detail the points in which theEmperor deserts the philosophy of the Schools for thetruer instincts of his own heart;but first it will bewise to inquireinto the contributions of his forerunners, and thus estimate his debt to Seneca and toEpictetus.

"""""""CHAPTER IIIDEVELOPMENT OF PHILOSOPHY IN ROMEANALYSIS1. Roman "Stoicism" as a familiar phase of human thought;faith - philosophy (in ethics) superinduced on naturalismand ivithout attempt at consistency.2. The Empire not the cause, but one among many symptoms, ofa widespread Quietism.3. Rome s contribution to Individualism ; as Nominalist, encourages the concrete and personal, in default of Hellenicappreciation of abstractions.4. $f.ner.(L definesweight toSummum Bonum"rather than toprcecepta"""as a Souldecreta"; and attache5. Decay of scientific dogmatism, and distaste for physicaphilology; Senecji seeks a moral Deity; and is unable toreconcile natural order and the moral law, or combine in asingle Supreme principle.6. His Dualism and Asceticism ;he repudiates utilitarian motivein Science, and dissuades from public life.7. The leisure of the true Sage occupied with friendship orintrospection.8. The chief goodas Tranquillity of Mind ; Egoism of allGreek philosophy.9. Absolute Inwardness of the chief good; as an attitude of mindwhich places happiness entirely in our own power, and neitherfinds nor demands correspondence in the outer world.1. IT isperhaps a little unfortunate that we talk ofStoicism as the predominant philosophy at Borneamong those whose energies, debarred from politicalaction, had passed into the fresh channel of speculation

""36 MARCUS AURELIUSon human conduct, independent of the civic sanction.If it is Stoicism at all, the tenets are very different fromwhat we can deem certain in the older School. To callit Eclecticism again, or worse still Syncretism, is to givea difficult name to a very familiar phase of the humanmind ;and perhaps to stifle the interest of an ordinaryreader, who will fancy he has to deal with profoundtruth or logical subtleties, rather than with a moralattitude which isvery likely nearlyakin to his own.The Roman character had indeed much in common withthe practical sobriety of the English. It held fast, inthe decay of local worships, to the original and honourable sentiments which social instinct had implanted,and tradition had ennobled and illustrated by heroicexample, duty to self, to parents, to friends, and tocountry. They were either unable or unwilling toanalyze the ultimate motives of conduct. The thoughtof tearing up the roots of moral behaviour and examining critically the springs of action was abhorrentto them. As Professor Huxley makes no pretence ataccommodating his human practice to the laws of theluniverse, as he completely separates the human function with its postulate of Freedom from the self-centredand predestined automatism of the rest of Creation ;so the Roman through evil report and good reportpreserved his sense of human dignity, and respectedthe claims which an exacting State or a capriciousFortune might make on his loyalty, forbearance, or selfsacrifice.He could not explain or justify ;but he wasconvinced that somehow it was his duty to act after theold time-honoured fashion. Divine sanctions might be1As completely as Maurice Maeterlinck in his Kingdom of Matter, oras Andrew Seth in Man s Place in the Cosmos.

PHILOSOPHY IN ROME 37mere fables, and that peculiar tutelage of godsfor menwhich has so often supported in good hopes and joyousnessthe victim of Chance. As the barriers of citystatesvanished, as the world became one, so a sense ofthe unity, of the distance, of God was borne in uponthe reflecting mind. A boundless expanse of Nature, aboundless leisure (save as an Imperial servant or official),an almost limitless state coextensive with the humanrace ;the decay, not merely of stirring municipal interests and competition, but of all except the vaguestpositive beliefs, these were the new facts to which thepractical and conscientious spiritadapt itself.of the Eoman had to2. It is an error to suppose that the peculiartendency of Eonian thought, from Cicero to Aurelius,was due to the Empire, as creating an atmosphere ofrestraint and suspicion, of psychological analysis, ofbrooding over wrongs and the injuryof an enforcedidleness. The institution of the Empire was clearlybut one of the symptomsof an abnormal condition ofhumanity in that age. No despotism has ever supported itself against the will of the majority. Theapotheosis of Caesar was a result, not a cause. Themost fanatical worshippers of past liberty in this agenever ventured to propose a substitute for the Caesarianregimen, though they were ready at any moment tochange the particular representative. The distaste foraffairs which ismostly attributed to Imperial jealousywas really the long-seated evil which rendered Caesarindispensable. A democracy (real or imaginary) whichhas disgusted the honest by its turbulence or venalityhas but one resort, the strong hand ;and Cicero inspite of his protestations, Seneca, and Aurelius, all

38 MARCUS AURELIUSrecognized this, and felt that the high Idealism, supporting a republican form of government, had passedaway for ever, and that the temper of the times demanded a personal and embodied Sovereign, dispenser1of the material benefits of justice, peace, and plenty.Over the Eoman world had spread this sombre veilof Quietism. This spirit had handed over to the conquerors as yet vigorous the independence of a weariedand diffident society, and had at last soughtits newestrecruits among the conquerors themselves. Speculationwas a higherlife than action ; indeed, was the highestkind of activity for those who claimed to be free.3. To this attitude of reserve and resignation, theEoman brought certain qualities of his own. It is thefashion to-day2to attribute to the Germano-Christianinfluence that emphasis on the liberty of the individualand his immortal destiny, which formed the secretimpulse of the Mediaeval Empire, in its ideals, constitution, and development, which resulted, breaking upthe Eealistic fabric inherited from Classical times, inthe Eeformation, and the movements of Emancipationwithin living memory. But it will not be fair to forgetthe precious contribution of Eome. Greece, while itrevelled in the wild and unaccountable caprice of somespoilt favourite of fortune, never rose to a full definitionof the Personal. The brief emphasis on the relativityof knowledge in the Sophistic age, only reacted into adeification of the Absolute ;and the so-called SubjectiveSchools failed, as we have already seen, to justify orto explain individual consciousness. They could only1See the undoubtedly sincere language of Seneca as to the Imperialresponsibilities and significance, De Clem. i. 1, 3, 4, 5.2 See Gierke s Political Ideals in the, Middle Ages.

PHILOSOPHY IN ROME 39point to a shadowy type of ideal man, before which allspecial or peculiar or relative qualitiesin each must besacrificed as excrescences. The Eoman, as practicalman of affairs even in retirement, knew nothing of theseabstractions. He refuses (with Horace)to bow theknee to any master. He subordinates all to practice,he disparages logical symmetry, and believes all timewasted which isspent in those dialectic subtleties, sodear to the Porch, in its early Megarian and Eristicdays. Cicero and Seneca mingle impartially, and without attempt at uniformity, the teaching of the Schoolsand the maxims of manyrivals. Even that IdealVirtue or Summum Bonum, which (in default of discovering the Sage) must ever remain beyond humanattainment, should be sought rather in the concrete,imitable form, which its nearest imitators have setbefore us, all the more useful because they are imperfect. Instead of reverence for Zeno and Chrysippus,masters of formula, we have respect for good men, forSocrates, Cato, and Brutus. The pages of Seneca arepleasantly diversified by anecdotes of honest citizens,whose approximations to Virtue are far more edifyingthan any solitary musing on ideal perfection. Thricethe Chief Good adoes Seneca startle us by callingSoul ! No distant sea of impersonal goodness, no realmof pure ideas, no unfaltering moral Law, above andirrespective of all particulars but an individual, who;had embodied and attained in some measure thathuman excellence of which all men were speaking,1 and1Both aperf and "virtus "areentirely mistranslated by "virtue."Virtue suggests, I think, an external standard which demands ourobedience without question or compromise ;while the other namesimply a far closer and implicit connexion between the ideal and per-

""""""Summum""""40 MARCUS AURELIUScould offer in the concrete circumstances of life illustrations of its method and value.4. In the 113th letter to Lucilius we find :Justitia quid est ? Animus quodammodose habens"In Letter 117, 12, Sapientia is defined as Mens perfectavel ad summum optimumque perducta. So, too, inthe Blessed Life," 4,Bonum est Animusfortuita despiciens"and in Letter 120, 8, when heisinquiring how the first rudimentary knowledge ofright and wrong came to us, he believes the example ofancient merit and heroism stirred us to realize, by anadmiration at first impulsive and involuntary (Fabriciusand Horatius Codes, hcec ethujusmodi facta imaginemndbis ostendere Virtutis In"). precisely the same spirit,he is averse to empty generalizations, to laws of conduct so universal that they cover everything andcounsel nothing. He recognizes greatest profit, notin these formal decreta," but in the praecepta ofthe casuist or the Director. The difficulty in Ethics(whether as a science or for individual guidance) isnever the discovery of general principles, but theirapplication. All Seneca s writings are occasional, andare prompted by the distress or spiritual needs of hisfriends. The mere idle repetitionplace, The good man alone ishappy,"of Stoic commonVirtue isthesonal interest. This was due to the vague teleology which dominatedGreek thought and its derivatives after Socrates. Harmony of inwardand outward was evdaL/j.ovta, tru/^wi ws, 6fj,o\oyov/j.{vi>)s rjv TTJ <f)v<jfi (withitsambiguous meaning). Apery was the means to this end desired byall ;and was attained by the development of the olKeiov tpyov, which inman (as opposed to Stag or Tiger) was a reasoned and consistentwhere unselfish admiration for alife." It is quite impossible to saylofty ideal of behaviour, and where the lower motive, urging us to tranquillity and peace in the only certain region of our consciousness,have their precise limits.

""PHILOSOPHY IN ROME 41sole end of Life,"did not interest him. Everyonebut few could_.agreed about the fundamental principles^;apply the minor premise. The austere Quintilian rebukes him for superficiality in his treatment ;but areally sincere casuistry must needs be opportunist anddisconnected, sometimes incoherent and even inconsistent. Philosophy was in want of a new Socrates tobring down formula again into life. We are certainlydisinclined to-day to quarrel with him for exchanging abarren and formal symmetry for moral earnestness ;just that personal, almost missionary, interest whichenables French writers 1 to compare him with theCatholic directors and father-confessors of the seventeenth century.5. The fabric of Certitude the great dogmaticCosmology of early Stoicism had crumbled into dust.Nothing was left of it except a sense of immensity,against which the Hellenic mind had from the outsetstriven nobly but in vain and a; conception of aUnity beyond all human appreciation. In all ultimateproblems, Seneca was an Agnostic, with a firm hold onthe dignity of the moral life, none the less firm becauseit was inconsistent. With all his Stoic protest thatKnowledge, like Life, was one, an impassable gulf yawnsbetween his theory and his practice. The earlier schoolhas been materialist and positive ;its theology was adepartment of its physics its ethics ; merely soundedthe recall from a corrupt and wearied society ofcivilized beings to a norm of nature and simplicitywhich no one cared to define precisely. But the firstcentury had passed beyond the naive positivism whichsuperimposed on universal automatism a doctrine of1M. Constant Martha among others.

"""42 MARCUS AURELIUSman s freedom and responsibility, and narrowed theterm natural to the passive resignation of an ascetic.The demand of the three Eoman Stoics is for a moralAuthor of the Universe. Their failure to discover anysatisfactory clue to the Divine dealings produced thatdeepening sense of vanity and distress. It is in thisconsciousness of failure that Aurelius seeks within thesolace he cannot find without, and becomes the first ofthe introspective Platonists. To Seneca all_dogmaisfluid, exceptthe belief in the final destruction of theworld. Though he yearns, with FicEte, to see God inthe moral order of the Universe," he is forced in theinterests of Unity to identify Him with every otherknown force. As He is everything, so any name willsuit Him. He is the sum of existence ;or the secretand abstract law which guidesit ;He is Nature orFate. The partial names of special deities are all His,and together they make up the fulness of the Divinetitle ;but they disappear in the immense nothingness,rather than colour or qualifyit. The special sense ofnearness to man, of a sympathy somethingmore thanphysical, of an approval and favour more clearly displayed than in a brilliant heaven and unerring laws,this iswanting. All Theology must be anthropomorphic or it ceases to be more than Natural Law. Abarrier (which we believe can never be transcended)separates man as a moral agent (or more clearly, as aconsciousness burdened with a sense of moral responsibility, which cannot be shaken off)from the rest of theUniverse. Any attempt at a Supreme Synthesis, fromthe side of either material or spiritual Law, is destinedto failure. The world is twofold ;and it is as foolishto forget the real in the Ideal, as it is to merge the

.""""PHILOSOPHY IN ROME 43ppecial consciousness of man in the processes of acausal series. Because Seneca cannot see the finger ofJGod in the world outside, and because he is determinedto find Him somewhere, he brings into prominence acertain dogma of the earlier school, the divinity of thesoul as a ray sent down from heaven ;and gives thispurely physical belief a new and a moral significance.Upon this semi - naturalistic, semi - mystical tenet,Epictetus, a truer follower of Socrates, builds his magnificent appeal to the children of a common Father.Early Stoicism doubted if Providence condescended toparticulars the School ended in Aurelius with denying:that God had any other home except theof the individual.purified spirit6. And the vast Universe which was thus leftriderless. To whose dominion was it entrusted ? Toa blind or malevolent spirit of caprice, with whomthe Sage could have no compromise. Nature to ourmodern Stoic meant emphatically the wise man s innernature ;his reasonable soul, as defined by Aristotle.The course of the world might be termed Providential,in a vague and general sense ;but the parts, the specialevents, were abandoned to the Usurper Fortune, justas in the Stoical Christian Lactantius, the Devil andno one else is the ruler of earth and the dispenser ofevery earthly blessing. As %wov \oyL/cbv man mightadmire the orbits of the stars, and find some delight inthe study of natural problems.But the more particularTouchenjoyment of her gifts was strictly interdicted.not, taste not, handle not was written on the vestibuleof the Stoic temple. All contact beyond pure necessities was disallowed ;as a scene of gaiety the worldwas forbidden ground ;theregnunihominisover

""""44 MARCUS AURELIUSthe inanimate was a sacrilegious profanation. TheStoic (always in theory and generally in practice also)gave up the present and the visible to the evil spirit,quite as decisively as the most pessimistic and introspective anchorite among the Christians. The doctrineof the sympathy of all things (av^TrdOeia, crvvdfaia)ended in a most rigorous contrast of man and nature.As Macaulay rightly objected, it was only to belooked at; any utilitarian motive in scientific knowledge is impiety in the eyes of Seneca or of his pupilLucilius. And again as o5oi> TTO^TIKOV man was intheory summoned to take part in a smaller world ofSociety. But the debates of the earlier Stoics exhibita ludicrous hesitation to enter publiclife.Many werethe excuses made, strange the pretexts accepted forthe evasion of this obvious and classical duty. Eitherthe actual State was too corrupt, or there were peculiariftemporary obstacles, which hindered this especialSage, and condemned him to a leisure which he acceptedwith pretended reluctance. Seneca is at least acuteenough to see that these protests were insincere, andthat it was the fixed ifunacknowledged resolve of theStoic Masters to abstain from politics.he tells us,The result,"is the same in either school ;whether theEpicurean refuse an active life unless the circumstancesare exceptional, or the Stoic condemn seclusion unlessthe State is too lawless, none of them ever do issueforth," and he notes their invariable counsel to theirfollowers to enter public life, and at the same timetheir invariable abstention.7. Debarred from the life of the voluptuary or theambitious, and welcomed to the somewhat frigid comfort of scientific studies, strictly without ulterior motive,

""PHILOSOPHY IN ROME 45the Stoic found this leisure but scantily occupied.Friends found a place in his heart and in his time, leftvacant by the disinterested scrutiny of natural phenomena. This new value of friendship had been the discovery of Epicurus and it ; gives a certain modern toneto the writings of Seneca, The old Esau-like turbulenceand suspicion of the intense city-state is as foreign tothe modern temper as to the early Imperial age.Domestic life and friendly intercourse has gained fromthe decay of purely municipal interest, from the delegation of power to a few, the creation of a publicservice, a bureaucracy, a Mandarinate." Seneca islike Cicero, the fatigued or disappointed man of action,who finds a consolation in abstract or psychologicalstudies ;or in the encouragement of friends to fightmanfully even a losing game against the allurementsof sense or the caprice of rulers. The old Eomanspirit was still keen. All interest centred round thelife of the moral agent, even though this has retainedlittle but passivity, a perpetual nonpossumus."Theentire teaching of Seneca may be grouped round hisportrait of the Sage, illustrating the Supreme Good inthe life of excellence, distinctively human. This portrait, which he delineates so carefully, adding littletouches at the call of some special need, he honestlytells us is drawn as much to comfort and strengthenhimself as his correspondent. He dilates almost convincingly on this calm constancy, and I shall devotethe ensuing chapter to describing this Ideal, and toexplaining some of the questions which arise from it.All the rest are indeed side issues, are episodes on theone unvarying theme, the Tranquillity of the WiseMan.

"""""46 MARCUS AURELIUS8. This as the guiding principle of actual life is asold as Democritus. As soon as inquiry into the widerworld of Nature had dissolved the old religious allegiance to family and country, the sole aim of the personallife was repose and self-sufficiency. The brief andclassical Athenian School alone (and that very imperfectly) continued to recognize an objective. It attemptedto revive the old sanctions of patriotism andpiety, andgive them a new meaning and universality. But theemphasis on Duty among the post-Aristotelians, andtheir large and comprehensive Providential Cosmology," cannot blind one to the egoisticaim of theirspeculation and practice. There I is, admit, the perennial question, never settled to the last, as to the trueinterpretation of Nature. Which ?my own/ or thatof the Universe ?To-day we are inclined to placeat opposite poles the heroism of sacrifice to the commongood, the piety of resignation to the divine, and anyscheme of self-realization. 1We connect the Stoics with the former ;but it mustbe remembered that the motive for their philosophy wasabove all utilitarian and eudsemonistic ;the attainmentof contentment and calm by a critical inquiry into theexact limits of man spowers and freedom, a comparison (ifyou like) of the universal and the special Nature,but, above all, from the point of view of the latter.(It is a mistaken and unfruitful labour to decide whethervirtue must be followed because it is God s will,irrespective of any consequences to us or because;plaincommon sense and experience of other men s follyassures us that lasting peace of mind is only reached1For a similar result in a modern mind, cf.Kirkengaard the Dane,quoted by M. A. Stobart, Fortnightly Review, 1902, January (see p. 49).

"""""""PHILOSOPHY IN ROME 47on this path. What system has ever clearly explainedthe motive of unselfishness ? l There lies at the rootof our nature an impulse to do good in which the overmastering joy of the emotion is strangely mixed withcalmer recognition of duty to one s neighbour and;it would be impossible to determine whether mysticalresignation springs entirely from love to God, or entirelyfrom a sense of the vainness of resistance. 2 )"9. However this may be, to Senecavirtue"_andhappiness wjr^_io^ntical ; objective and subjective not;a mere empty postulate of correspondence, but a real3tasted and tested unity. He is quite convinced ofthe follyof the lower lives. He sees in their votariescreatures of impulse, 4 swayed by unworthy passion orambition, slaves of their surroundings (for the rich areand are not real possessed," possessors), who havelaboured gratuitously to make comfort in life unattainable, because they strive only to increase, instead ofdiminish, the multitude of things they cannot dowithout. Here is the casus belli between Senecaand Bacon as portrayed in Macaulay s famous essay.Seneca had seen through the illusion of a complexcivilisation. He lived in the midst of such ; nay, hehimself enjoyed a command over the material, therefined, the artistic, which very few of us can claim1 Fit. Seat. 9:"Sed tu quoque" inquit, "virtutem non ob aliudcolisquam quia aliquam ex ilia speras voluptatem.":* This is, of course,contested ;but it becomes a mere question of words.2Benef. iv. 2.3e.g. Vit. Beat. 3 : "Nam pro voluptatibus et pro illis quse parvaet fragilia sunt et in ipsis flagitiis noxia, ingens Gaudium subit inconcussumet sequabile: turn pax et concordia aninii et magnitude cummansuetudine."4 ""The Marionnettes

""""48 MARCUS AURELIUSto-day, and which was outside the wildest speculationof the apostle of the Eegnuni hominis." The ordinaryRoman city-slave was probably more fastidious andexacting than an Englishman of the middle classto-day; and we know how little the terrors of crossand whip tempered the gaiety or controlled the mischievous intrigues of these happy and irresponsiblechildren. But satiety and disgust is the note ofpolished Rome in the early imperial age ;of which anexquisite sensuality was rather the effect than thecause. It seemed to Seneca consummate folly togive hostages to fortune, or to found one s spiritualhappiness on an unsubstantial fabric of external wealth,I1or the favour of a monarch, or a people s praise. Notfor the most exalted indifference, but in pure commonsense, had the early Stoics repudiated the Aristotelianand Peripatetic alliance, or compromise with the outergoods." Surely the content of a soul at peace withitself must depend on nothing which fortune couldinjure or take away. 2 Happiness must be somethingaltogether tSiov, ava^aiperov, something private, eternal,inexhaustible, unassailable ;and in the face of the extravagant claims of science to-day, we may complainthat (even in the Churches) this wholesome caution ofthe Stoics is forgotten. Resignation, unselfishness, is1 Civilization and its increased wants and complexity of living passedunder the censure of both schools. Stobseus, Floril. xvii. :En/coOpo?dpUTijOeis TrcDs &v ns Tr^vrrpeiev ; rois ofiffi Of> 7rpo<m#ds tfyt] TTJS 5 xpa ctsra TroXXd TrepiT^/Jivwv.2Ep. 66 : Omnia enim ista, in quae dominium Casus exercet, servasunt ; pecunia et corpus et honores : imbecilla, fluida, mortalia, possessionisincestse. Ilia rursus libera et invicta opera virtutis ; quse nonideo magis appetenda sunt si benignius a Fortuna tractantur ;nee minussi aliqua rerum iniquitate premuntur.

""""PHILOSOPHY IN ROME 49certainly not the centre, nor the motive, of theirsystem.Fortn., Jan. 1902.M. A. Stobart,It isperhaps by theexpression, desire to enjoy life, that the ^Esthetic goal canmost fitly be epitomized. And here lies the difference ofthe two forms of living, the cesthetic and the moral.For the conditions attending the necessity to enjoy lifeexist (says the Danish apostle) either outside the individual, or,if contained within himself as in shape of health, sport, orpleasure entering in any of a thousand forms are of such anature as to be beyond his own control j they are conditions, inother words, they are relative to circumstances of time, country,surroundings, and the inherited place in the world of theindividual, whose spontaneity of action is controlled by arelationship to Destiny, which is beyondresponsibility.his own limit ofWhereas in the Ethical, the conditions of life are contained within and not outside the individual ;for the trueEthical sphere is reached (says K.) alone by inwardness ; bysubjective conquest of the will, by the evolution of a powerof will which, making in the direction of a consciousness ofthe value of the soul, as a portion of the Eternal Entity, givesa continuity, a teleological value to every action, lackingin the ^Esthetic Life of Relativity, which is of the moment,and as such is subject to fluctuating alternatives of joy anddespair.There comes (says K.) to everyone a time when he outgrows the spontaneous qualities of his child s nature, when hebecomes dissatisfied with a haphazard relationship to Timeand to Existence, and wishes to assure himself of a definiteplace in the scheme of the universe ;when he realizes, withthe Preacher of old, the vanity, the transitoriness, of thatupon which he had set his mind and; when, unconsciously itmay be, he longs to grasp himself as Soul, as an Eternal Entity,rather than as a fleeting Ego, and despair is the result.4

""50 MARCUS AURELIUSDespair is the culmination of the aesthetic life, which isitself despair, transitoriness being of its essence, and themoment of Despair may be the moment of the choice. It ison the importance of this choice that K. lays stress. Notthat it is absolute as between good and evil. The ^Estheticlife is not evil, it is indifferent. The importance lies in thefact that what is chosen is the Self, not as a limited relativeEgo in a circumscribed existence, but the Self as a portion ofEternity, of the great and everlasting power. This choiceconstitutes in itself a treasure within each man that makeshim greater than the angels. Nothing, he says, in life canequal the solemnity, the significance of the moment, when theIndividual becomes conscious of and chooses his Self as a portionof the Eternal Whole. At such a moment, when all Naturearound is hushed, serene as a starry night, and the soul is alonein all the world, then will the heavens seem to divide, and therewill be made visible the Everlasting Power. Then will theEgo become for the first time conscious of, and being consciousof, will choose or rather accept his Self. Then has the Soulseen the Highest, what no mortal eye can ever see, and whatcan never be forgotten, the Soul has received that knighthood which ennobles it for all Eternity. He becomes, notanother personality ;but he becomes Himself ;consciousnessunites its fragments, and he is for the first time Himself.This ethical (itisapparent in Kir. s view)is but therainbow-bridge to the last of the three great spheres, ./Esthetic,Ethical, and Religious, to which throughout his writings heintroduces us. The bias of his own mind was never towardsthe purely human moral, which, according to his teaching inEither, Or, required an open dealing with the world incompatible with his own mystical and recondite nature but;towards pietistic and exacting religion."

"""CHAPTER IV"THEWISE MAN";1. Ideal of Quietism; Thein Retirement.ANALYSIS"Summurn Bonum" as the Wise Man2. Man as spectator, not as agent ; an ascetic ideal which recursperpetually in history.3. Stoic maxim "Follow Nature" the exact converse to modernNaturalism ;man s peculiar nature as his power to criticise,4.without enjoying.The Golden Age"Aureliuj.The Fall;Seneca more optimistic tjian.5. External Nature = God; and natural studies unfold the essenceof the Deity (physical Pantheism).6. At the same time, needs of man s moral nature demand as complementary doctrine. Spiritual pantheism; God contrastedwith the world, as man s Soul with his body. Failure of allsynthetic and monistic systems.7. Seneca s depreciation of History as the realmt of the contingentand perishing, by the side of Natural Law, or the contemplation of the Eternal and unchanging.8. His Psychology entirely Platonic and_dua.lM ; a still morecomplete separation of the two spheres in Gnostics; ChristianChurch struggles against the Dualism and Abstention ofclassical antiquity.9. Summary of the various sides of philosophic thought which meetin the Systemof Seneca^1. LET us now look at two or three passages in whichSeneca depicts this ideal of quietism and self-sufficingcalm.51

""52 MARCUS AURELIUSEp. 45 Si vis utique verborum :ambiguitates diducere, hocnos doce beatum non eum esse quern vulgus appellat, ad quernpecunia magna confluxit Sed ilium cui bonum omne in animo:est, erectum et excelsum et mirabilia calcantem ; qui neminemvidet cum quo se commutatum velit ; qui hominem ea solaparte sestimat, qua homo est; qui Natural magistra utitur, adillius leges componitur, sic vivit quomodo Ilia praescripsit ;cui bona sua nulla vis excutit ; qui mala in bonum vertit ;certus judicii, inconcussus, intrepidus ; quern aliqua vis movet,nulla perturbat; quern Fortuna, quum quod habuit telum:nocentissimum, vi maxima intorsit, pungit non vulnerat, ethoc raro."Ad primum revertamur et consideremus id qualeEp. 66 "sit. Animus intuens vera, peritus fugiendorum ac petendorum,non ex opinione sed ex Natura pretia rebus imponens, toti seinserens mundo et in omnes ejus actus contemplationem suammittens, cogitationibus actionibus intentus, ex sequo magnusac vehemens, asperis blandisque pariter invictus, neutri seFortunae submittens, supra omnia quae contingunt acciduntqueeminens, pulcherrimus ornatissimus cum decore, cumviribus sanus ac siccus, imperturbatus intrepidus, quernnulla vis frangat, quern nee attollant fortuita nee deprimant.Talis Animus Virtus est."Vit. Beat. 4 :Quid enim prohibet nos beatam vitamdicere, liberum Animum et erectum, et interritum ac stabilem,extra metum extra cupiditatem positum? cui unum bonumhonestas, unum malum turpitude1 Caetera vilis turba rerum,nee detrahens quicquam beatae vitae, nee adjiciens, sine auctuac detrimento Summi Boni veniens ac recedens. Hunc itafundatum necesse est (velit nolit) sequatur hilaritas continuaet laetitia alta atq. ex alto veniens, ut quae suis gaudeatnee majora domesticis cupiat ... 5. Ergo exeundum adLibertatem est: hanc non alia res tribuit quam Fortunaenegligentia. Turn illud orietur insestimabile bonum, quiesmentis in tuto collocatse et sublimitas."

""""THE WISE MAN" 53Ep. xxxi. "Perfecta Virtus . . . aequalitasac tenor vitseper omnia consonans sibi; . . . hoc est Summum Bonum :quod si occupas incipis Deorum esse socius non supplex!beatse vitae . . . solida securitas etejusEp. xliv. : "Summainconcussa fiducia."Ep. lix. :"Tails est sapientis Animus qualis Mundi statussuper Lunam ; semperillic serenum est."Ep. xcii. "Quid est beata vita : 1 Securitas et perpetuatranquillitas. Hanc dabit Animi magnitude, dabit constantiabenejudicatitenax. . . . Talis animus Sapientis esse viri debet,"qualis Deum deceat."Ep. cxxiv. : Vis tu, relictis in quibus vinci te necesse est,dum in aliena niteris, ad bonum reverti tuum ?Quod hocest ? Animus scilicet emendatus ac purus, semulator Dei,super humana se extollens, nihil extra se sui ponens."2. There isperhaps nothing strikingly original inthis picture. We^ see the universal features of sagea,nd student- detachment, indjffeffejice. peace. It isneither purely Oriental (Buddhist or Brahmin), norHellenic. It issimply human and catholic. Theearly Greeks did not borrow from India, any more thanMadame de Guy on or St. Theresa, for example, wereindebted to Plotinus. The abstentionist tendency recurswithout any historic or spiritualconnection between itsseveral exponents. The philosopher, as true man, isrepresented as spectator rather than as agent. Wewatch the gradually extinguished fires of social action ;the faint flicker or the chilled embers of critical study ;finally, the obscure night of unconscious indifference.We are on the brink of the mystic precipice. It is1Compare the attitude of M. Renan, to whom, as student, the worldis so interesting in its distress and sinfulness, that he would not attemptto reform it.1

"""54 MARCUS AURELIUSclear from ancient history that the critical attitudebecomes a favourite, when the concrete particular oflife is distrusted or despised ;whenthe generalizationsof the student are alone supposed to contain the truth.We have seen how the outer world, though nominallysubject to providential ruling, was yet really in thehands of an incalculable caprice. This amounted toa denial of Providence ;and the periodical contestsbetween Stoic and Epicurean, of which Lucian gives usan instance a century later, were purely verbal andacademic. Quintilian, in numberless passages, shows ushow intimately connected was the thought of Providencewith interest in public duty. If only the unchangingand permanentis real, if the personal and the particularare illusion or a debased copy of the unseen, interest inthe world s transformation gives place to the purelyscientific respect, which we note in Seneca s correspondent, Lucilius. Christianity lays a similar Platonicemphasis on the world of true Being,"but has neverforgotten, in the clouds of formula or dogmatic dialectic,that the world exists for the trial and discipline ofsouls, an assumption which it iseasy to ridicule asanthropocenfcric,"and on which reposes the wholecomplex of Western Ethics and European Society.3. This rigid consistency and undeviating tenor oflife, by which a man becomes "his own," free, andhappy, is to be maintained by following nature, inthe double sense, accepiiag. his allotted destiny withoutmurmur, and exercisingthe distinctively human facultyjn himself. He must abandon, if he seeks perfection,every claim upon the fragile and insecure environment,thewhich hems in his inward lifenon-ego," ;andagain, every quality or equipment which he has in

"What""THE WISE MAN" 55common with lower animals. We often connectschemes of Naturalism with a whole-hearted devotionto Nature. Eousseau and Thoreau, to name two instances, would lead one back to the simplest pleasuresof unreflective acquiescence and to impulsive emotion.But the philosophic mind of antiquity was far moreaustere. Reacting against a selfish or corrupt civilization, it seems to recall men to a golden age of harmonywith Nature. The result was widely different. It setup an altar to Reason in the abstract, the faculty which*criticizes and does not enjoy;, while by its own experience it was sadly convinced that the particular manifestation of this Eternal Intelligence, in Socrates orZeno, was imperfect and infirm. Hence its systematictrend towards Mysticism, towards a surrender of thevisible world, a depreciation of the value of the present,incompatible with any true sympathy with Nature.In spite of his own weakness to attain truth, the sagecould not, even in the Epicurean School, throw off thecritical and analytic spirit and become a child ofNature. Those who think that the Hellenic temperminimizes the gulf between man and the natural world,are most assuredly blind. It was this immediate query,ismy nature in relation to the Universal ?which convinced them of the essential opposition. Ifman had any true affinity, it was with the stars andtheir automatic precision and unreflecting perfection,not with the God-forsaken region of the sublunary.Because man could criticize as well as enjoy, a combination implied in conscious happiness, could analyseas well as act, and because the lower animals whowere %wa d\oya could only act and enjoy, it seemedclear that man s special function lay in the other

"""56 MARCUS AURELIUSdirection. A modern Naturalism might find in theencouragement of the ape and tiger the true end ofman ;a resolute egoism which saw our duty in thecontinuance in the human arena of that struggle forlife,sphere.that boundless competition, which marks the lowerCertainly no disciple of the School could placethe special virtue of man in the feminine passivity offorbearance, abstention, mildness, and indifference ;orin a contemplative study which set a veto on morefamiliar intercourse. It seems clear that to the Greeksand Romans, Nature never lost her old terrible character, which she bears still to the superstitious savage ;haunted in every tree or grotto or river by jealous andunaccountable powers; unstable, insecure, a Siren wholavishes her allurements only to slay. The almost universal transference of force from grotesque or malignantspirits to impartial mechanism failed to relieve man ofthis sense of foreignness and alienation. Lucretius, likemany another apostle of religious or social freedom,exults in vain over an empty victory, and thinks thediscovery of law, or, at least, of uniformity, implies theattainment of liberty. Epicurus, his master, saw moretruly into the heart of man and knew that mechanical;law, though more satisfying to the sage, because heseems to control by understanding it, is yet to the sageas man, more intolerable than the propitiable caprice ofthe expelled Daemons. Be this as itmay,it is certainthat the Classical nations never entered, in spite ofseveral efforts, into that blissful harmonywith Naturewhich should have saved them this recurring problem :What ismy peculiar nature, duty, or happiness inrelation to the whole ?4. The sense of theFall,"of the relapse from an

"""THE WISE MAN" 57early and primitive age of Gold, of the gradual decay ofmen, of States, of this fertile earth itself, is visible inall ancient authors. The writers of the Augustan agewith one consent sing the praises of this lost felicity ;and advise all who can to revert to a simplicity whichthey could not attain themselves. Seneca thinks ft iapossible to_return to this_^jtajej>efore the. Fall." He,?ar more optimistic than Aurelius, believes in man sinnate goodness and his power to obtain happiness bylimiting his wants and trusting Nature. He...evenattacks the doctrine of Original Sin so dear toAugustan (as well as Augustinian) speculators :"Ep. xciv. (55) : Erras enim si existimas nobiscum vitianasci. Supervenerunt, ingesta sunt. Nulli nos vitio Naturaconciliat ilia :integros ac liberos Cons, adgenuit."Helv. 5 :"Bona conditione geniti sumus si earn non deseruerimus ;idegit Rer. Natura ut ad bene vivendum non magno apparatuopus Brev. esset." Vit. 2 "Quid de Rer. Natura querimur 1:Ilia se benigne gessit :vita si scias uti longa est.": Sic nos amantissima nostri Natura disposuit, utEp. Ixxviii. "dolorem aut tolerabilem aut brevem faceret."Ep. xc. : "Nonfuit tarn ininiica Natura, ut . . . homosolus non posset sine totartibus vivere ... ad parata nati sumus ... a Natura luxuriadescivit."Ep. cviii. "Omnibus enim Natura fundamenta:dedit, semenque virtutum omnes ad omnia ista nati:sumus."aliquid cognoscitur bonum 1 Si perfecteEp. cxviii. "Unde :secundum Naturam est ... hsec ejus proprietasest."Ep. cxxii.:"Omnia vitia contra Naturam pugnant (aversandi diem ettotam vitam in noctem transferendi)."Ep. 1. "Virtus secundum Naturam est : ;vitia inimica etinfesta sunt."Ep. Ixvi. "Bonum sine ratione nullum : est; sequitur autemratio Naturam. Quid est ergo ratio 1 Naturae imitatio. Quid

"""""""""58 MARCUS AURELIUSest summum hominis bonum 1ex Naturae voluntate se gerere.. . . Bonorumunum proposition est consentire Naturae."5. But we cannot help noticing that the termNature is unstable and precarious. He is not usingitin the ordinary and current sense. Just as it is impossiblein Lucan to decide on the limits or essentialdifference of Fate and Fortune, which are probablyidentical, so Seneca uses Nature and God interchangeably. But we have already seen how the moralizing ofthe Divine Idea in the Roman Stoics had shaken thehold of the Divine Being on the actual world, "Semperparet, semel jussit."He does not control the physicaluniverse, or the lot of individuals. He is like a parentin the folk-lore tales sending out his children into aworld, scantily equipped with a few maxims of prudenceand a father s blessing. Insita sunt nobis omniumaetatum omniumque artium semina, magisterque exocculto Dens producit ingenia" (Benef. iv. 6).Hiscollocutor rejoins that it is Nature and not God (as aspecial providence), Natura haec mihi praestat."Senecawill not hear of the antithesis : Nonne intelligis, tecum hoc dicis, mutare nomen Deo ? Quid enim estaliud Natura quam Deus et Divina Ratio toti mundoinserta."partibusque ejus 8.Ergo nihil agis, ingratissimemortaliurn, qui te negas Deo debere, sedNaturae." Quia nee Natura sine Deo est, nee Deusnee distat officio."sine Natura, sed idem est utrumque(See also N. Q. ii. 45; 1. i. prolog. : "Quid est Deus?mens universi. Quid est Deus ?quod vides totum etquod non vides totum ;with which we may compareLucan s famous line :Jupiter est quodcunque vides,Now here, as in most parts ofquodcunque moveris.")

"""THE WISE MAN" 59the Stoical physical ethics (an absurd attempt to unitethe irreconcilable), we see two conflicting tendencies.Again and again does Seneca hymn the delights ofScience ;for it is an inquiry into God ;it is the truestoccupation of the Sage s leisure ;not the mere d^era-/^eX^To? rjSovrj of Plato, but a real insight into God ssecrets and inmost essence. So much for the contemplative side. Speculatively, the universe is one andthe individual a part ;God is Nature.6. But the moment the practical or moral side isapproached, this postulated harmony at once disappears.The Deity is implicitly in strongest contrast to the workof his hands, just as man, as spirit, as intelligence, is tohis body. Universe and body are for practice, dismissedwith epithets as contemptuous, as ascetic, as are everfound in the frankly Dualist Schools. The real essenceof the Divine creeps into the soul of the wise man, toescape, as it were, from the creature which has passedbeyond control. There is even a certain chivalry toa fallen and exiled monarch. God isquod non videstotum, quodcunque moveris the; thoughts of thegood, the unseen world (such as a Eoman could conceiveit) ;and the tendency of all Pantheism is to separatemore sharply than before the natural mechanism inwhich it starts, from the transcendent spirit, in whichit invariably ends. Every attempt to unifythe worldin a gigantic and audacious synthesis issues in thisstrange Dualism. The unequally mated yoke-fellowsspring apart all the more vehemently for their briefand enforced companionship. So Seneca, when he bidsus follow Nature, because Nature is God, is not reallygiving us a maxim for practical life. (Ot. 5 "Ergo,:secundum Natura vivo, si totum me illi dedi,

""60 MARCUS AURELIUSsi illius adinirator cultorque sum. Natura autemutrumque facere me voluit et agere et contemplation!vacare. Utrumque facio quoniam ne contemplatioquidem sine actione est.")The wise man found the unity demanded by hisIreason only in theory from the life of action he felt;(himself debarred. Underlying the word nature aretwo polar conceptions. The one would seem to banishreflexion and immerse in a life of natural wants andpleasures ;but the identification with God in thesecond sense lays stress on the special prerogative ofman, his reason ;enshrines the deity in his inmost souland(" quasi Deum in humano corpore hospitantem ") ;to enable him to maintain in some region the fiction of;.Unity, condemns him to moral passivity and negation,/or as a counsel of perfection, perpetual contemplationof the physical order, an eternal but unmeaningspectacle.7. It is consonant with this attitude that Senecashould depreciate history, the pageant of man on theof time. The Romans could form no estimate ofstagethe significance of the Empire. It was reserved forforeigners in a later age, like Eutilius, or Claudian, orCorippus, or even Dante, to see the immense advancewhich Augustus (rather than Julius) had effected, withsuch ironical modesty, in political ideals. The Emperor?ilurelius is free from the slightest sympathy with the*^past, as from any hope for the future. Barely does hemention a historic name, except to point the moral ofthe futility and nothingness of men, and the thingsabout which they toil and struggle in the brief andhe isfeverish nightmare of And life. Seneca, thoughnot as blind as Tacitus or Suetonius to the meaning of

""""THE WISE MAN" 61the Empire, 1 yet has no sort of appreciation for thetransient and yet glorious attempt of Alexander.Eomeadopted his precedent and gave it life ; original innothing save in the power to clothe an ideal with fleshand blood, and give a frozen statue life. Yet Senecaonly talks of the latrocinia Alexandri," and turns indisgust to scientific studies.8. This is not the place to enter fully into Seneca spsychology. It will be enough to observe that, like allthe Eomans, he adopts the Platonic^ imagery of theimprisonment of a pure and divine element in a fleshlytomb of dross or mud. He rivals the mystic in theintensity of his desire to_fljjrom this hateful companionship. The precise form of pantheism dominant in theEoman Empire at this time tended to sever body andsoul from any joint action. The Gnostics carried thistendency to its utmost limits. Their practical teachingis a caricature of the Stoic Sage with its carelessnessof externals, or of moral action, and its exclusiveinsistence on the purity of the divine particle within :this could not be defiled by any bodily deeds, and sothese were dismissed as superfluousor immaterial :97 7\wcrcr o/jbtofjLox rjBe (frprjv dvob/uoTOS. Against thistendency the Christian Church struggled persistently1 Of. his probably sincere words on the Emperor s position, duties,and responsibilities, DQ Clem. i. 2, 3, 4: "Egoex omnibus mortalibusplacui electusque sum qui in terris Deorum vice fungerer,ego vitse necisque gentibus arbiter, etc. etc. 8. Quam multa tibi nonlicent quse nobis beneficio tuo licent !See also Consol. ad Polyliumwith its eulogy of Claudius and conception of Imperial responsibilities ;and the whole of Ep. IxxiiL, especially 18 :Confitebitur ergo multumse debere ei, cujus administratione et providentia contingit illi pingue"otiuni et arbitrium sui temporis, et imperturbata publicis occupationibusquies. Melibcee (quotes Seneca with approval) Deus nobis hsecotia fecit.

"""""62 MARCUS AURELIUSand not in vain. Epictetus and Aureiius both seekto depreciate the bodv^ and with it external action, byharsh and contemptuous names. These Platonic andGnostic ideas were widely diffused and accepted in thisepoch, to the lasting prejudice of morals. They arecertainly clearly visible in Seneca; but the vaguenessof his definition must here preclude us from attemptingprecise treatment. Suffice it to point out in correctionof a common error, that this Dualism was far moregenerally predominant in Pagan than in Christian Ethics.9. I shall conclude this episode, already overlong,with a rapid summary of Seneca s tenets and characteristics, as they maybe collected in the disconnectedseries of occasional writings. As a practical Eomanseeking guidance for the single life, he objects to thedegradation of Philosophy to Philology. 1 As a Stoiche adopts loyally the doctrine of the Sufficiency ofVirtue,"honestum," as the only End. As a manof experience who has mixed with men and courts, hebelieves all^ men arebut<^od_b_nati^e j_ jire blindedor warped ^""convention,and by ignorance whichpursues false goods the; simplicity of earlier lifewas the Golden Age. As a Monist, he holds thisUniversal Nature as the true guide, which has givenus the special dower of Reason., and calls us (whetherwe name her God or Providence or Fate) to enjoy hercontemplation rather than abuse her bounty. As aPessimist, he teaches that the true life, the genuinephilosophy, is a perpetual meditation on death, exile,pain, 2 and poverty ;for the world outside, with all its1Epp. 27 (16), 45, 48, 49, 82 (9, 19, 22), 83, 88, 106, 108(23, 35), 109(17), 111, 113 (17, 25) ;Srev. Vit. 10.2Ep. 114 : Nihil tamen seque tibi profuerit ad temperantiam omnium

"""""""THE WISE MAN" 63method and order, has n correspondence to the sage s"good will,"and (unlike the theory of Descartes) theDeity cannot or will not bringabout occasionalisticconformity. As a Manichee, this world-order is theEealm of Chance or Fortune, conceived as a malignantspirit, with whom the good can have no dealings. Asa Personalist, he prefers example to precept, and hasperhaps adopted the Stoic profession because he findsin the worthies of Eoman annals living (if unconscious)patterns of scholastic Virtue." As a Scientist, hefails to appreciate the value of History as giving signsof advancement and of progress, as ministering comfortto our sense of weakness and failure : the only trueleisure from self-improvementis to study the universallaws, not the records of human frailty.As a Probabilist,he isapt to follow the popular voice, theconsensus gentium,"rather than applaud theheureticpower of the speculative reason. 1 As an Agnostic, hedeclines to pronounce on any ultimate problem exceptthe sufficiency of Virtue," the solidarity of the humanbrotherhood, the unity of the cosmic order ;he does notflatter himself he has reached truth. 2 Finally, as aMystic, his aspirations are often devotional ;and thererum quam cogitatio brevis sevi et hujus incerti ; quicquid facias,respice ad Mortem." (Cf. also Ep. cxx., quoted on p. 65.)1The attentiveness of Heaven to our prayers isproved by the manifestconcurrence of human opinion and practice, not by a, priori qualificationof the God s nature. Benef. iv. 4 "Non surda numina et inefficaces:Deos."Similarly, personal immortality, on which he is very ambiguous,follows on popular acceptance rather than dogmatic teaching.2Belief, iv. 33 :Nunquam exspectare nos certissimam rerumcomprehensionem quoniam in arduo est Veri exploratio sed ea; ire,qua ducit Veri similitude. Sequimur qua Ratio, non qua Veritasducit," thus in the end a chasm yawns between the separate subjectivereason and objective Truth,

"""64 MARCUS AURELIUSSage is the peer of God, except_in eternity, for bothhave made "ilgrand rifiuto," the great renunciation. 1Both view the world, saying, Haec omnia mea sunt;but onlyif neither attempt to control or to enjoy ; and!itmay be that he felt that the trulyDivine in theouter order met and blended with the single pointof human consciousness, and found there its highest;expression, and its only secure asylum.APPENDIXIn order to complete the portrayal of Seneca as a philosopher,and to allow him the same opportunity as we shall give toEpictetus and Aurelius, I subjoin certain selected passageson the subjects of chief Stoical :import the nature of manand of the world ;the divinity of the soul and its future life ;the scientific or religious interest, and the true function ofthe wise to contemplaterather than act. We shall detecthere, without need of further comment or elucidation, thegrowing tendency to free the spiritual element (and notion)from the husk or envelope of physical constraint, and elevatea transcendental concept of soul and deity, in place of animmanent abstraction.A 1. The soul as Divine; Ep. xxxi. : "Animus rectus . . .Quid aliud voces hunc, quam Deum in humano corpore hospitantem?Ep. xli. "Non sunt ad coelum elevandae manus,:nee exorandus sedituus . . .prope est a te Deus, tecum est,intus est. Ita dico Lucili, sacer intra nos spiritus sedetmalorum bonorumque nostr. observator et custos. ... In1Ep. xxxi. ad "fin. Tutum iter : est, jucundum, ad quod Natura teinstruxit. Dedit tibi Ilia quse si non deserueris par Deo surges. Paremautem Deo pecunia non faciet : Deus nihil habet. Prsetexta non faciet :Deus nudus est. Fama non faciet . . . nemo novit Deum."

""An"THE WISE MAN" 65unoquoque bonorum ( quis deus incertum est )habitat"(The good man,) "majore sui parte illic est, unde descendit.Quemadmod. radii solis contingunt quidem terrain sed ibi suntunde mittuntur ;sic Animus magnus et sacer, et in hoc demissusut propius divina nossemus, conversatur quidem nobiscum,sed hseret originisues."Ep. Ixxiii. : "Miraris hominemad deos ire 1Deus ad homines venit, immo quod propius est,in homines venit. Nulla sine Deo mens bona est. Seminain corporibus humanis divina dispersasunt."Ep. xcii. "Hie:Deos sequat, illo tendit, originis sues memor . . . Quid estautem cur non existimes in eo divini aliquid existere, quiDei pars est. Totum hoc quo continemur, et unum est etDeus : et socii sumus et membra. Capax est noster animus."Ep. cxx. "Perfectum animuin :. . .supra quern nihil estnisi mens Dei ex qua pars et in hoc pectus mortale defluxit ;quod nunquam magis divinum est quam ubi mortalitatemsuam cogitat."Ot. Sapientis, 32 :illud verum sitquo maximeprobatur, hominem divini spiritus esse partem,ac velutiscintillas quasdam sacrorum in terras desiluisse atque alienoloco hsesisse ?est : ..."Cons, ad Helv. 6 : Mobilis et inquieta mens homini dataYaga et quietis impatiens et iiovitate rerumlaetissima: quod non miraberis si primam ejus originemaspexeris. Non ex terreno et gravi concreta corpore ;ex illocaelesti spiritu descendit ... ex iisdem quibus divina constant compositu(s)A seminibus."2. The Body is contemptible, a burden to the soaringimpulse of spirit. Ep. Ixxviii. Vir "magnus ac prudens:animum deducit a corpore, et multum cum meliore et divinaparte versatur ;cum hac querula ac fragili quantum necesseest."Ep. cii. : "Gravi terrenoque detineor. . . . Quicquidcirca te jacet rerum, tanquam hospitalis loci sarcinas specta ;transeundum est. . . . Detrahetur tibi hsec circumjectanovissimum velamentum tui cutis ;detrahetur caro . . . ossa

166 MARCUS AURELIUSnervique. Depone onus ^Equo animo membra jam . . supervacuadimitte eti stud corpus inhabitatum diu pone.. ! . . .Quidista sic diligis quasi tua? istis opertus es."(Ishtar s descent.)domum esse hoc corpus sed Jiospitium etEp. cxx. "Nee :quidem breve hinc atque hinc tentamur et . . expellimur . ;hoc evenire solet in alieno habitantibus. . . . Nos corpustarn putre sortiti," etc. Ep. Ixv. "Ista enim omnia : . . .attollunt et levant animum qui gravi sarcina pressusexplicari cupit et reverti ad ilia quorum fuit. Nam corpushoc animi pondus ac pcena est; premente illo urgetur, invinculis est nisi accessit Philosophia."Cons, ad Helv. 11 : "haec circumfusa gravis sarcina . . .Corpusculum hoc custodia et vinculum animi." Ep. xxiv. :"Mortale et fragile corpusculum. . .grave corporis nieipondus."C. Soul thus distinguished from the grosser envelope findsits chief delight in science and contemplation. Ot. Sap. 32 :"Curiosum nobis Natura ingenium dedit; et artis sibi acpulcritudinis suae conscia, spectatores nos tantis rerumspectaculis genuit. ... In media nos sui parte constituit,nee erexit tantunmiodoet circuinspectum omnium nobis dedit ;hominem, sed etiam ad .contemplationem. . sublime fecitillicaput ... ad haec quaerenda nato. . . . Natura autemutrumque facere me voluit et agere et contemplationi vacare."Brev. Vit. 19: "Recipe te ad haec tranquilliora, tutiora,!majora ad haec sacra et sublimia accedas, sciturus quaemateria sit ?Diis, quae voluptas quis animum tuum casusexspectet, ubi nos a corporibus dimissas Natura componat ?etc.(hence will arise) cupiditatum oblivio, vivendi atque moriendiscientia, alta rerum quies." Ep. Iviii. : "Imbecilli fluid ique perintervalla consistimus ;mittamus animum ad ilia quae aeternasunt ;miremur in sublimi volitantes rerum omnium formase. Ideas(i.Platonicas) ; Deumque inter ilia versantem."Ep. Ixv. "(Philosophy) ilium respirare Rer. Naturae spectaculojussit et a terrenis dimisit ad divina. Haec libertas ejus est,

""THE WISE MAN"67haec evagatio; subducit interim se custodice in qua teneturet cselo reficitur."Ep. Ixxix. (This study begun here inreverent spirit is the delight of heaven hereafter for thereleased souls):"Licet contentus interim sit effugisse tenebras,adhuc non fruitur bono lucis. Tune Animus noster habebitquod gratuletur sibi, quum emissus his tenebris in quibusvolutatur . . . totem diem admiserit, et redditus caelo suofuerit, quum receperit locum quern occupavit sorte nascendi.Sursum vocant ilium initia sua. Erit autem illic etiamantequam hac custodia exsolvatur, quum vitia disjecerit . . .in divinas cogitationes emicuerit."Ep. Ixxxii. : "(Fortuna)neminem occupat nisi hserentem sibi. Itaque quantumpossumus ab ilia resiliamus ; quod sola praastabitsui Naturcequecognitio : sciat quo iturus sit, unde ortus," etc.Ep. Ixxxviii. : "Magna et spatiosa res est Sapientia . . . dedivinis humanisque discendum est ... an per se sit aliquid,deinde an aliquid ante tempus sit, sitempus cum mundocseperit, an et ante mundum quia fuerit aliquid,fuerit ettempus. Innumerabiles qussstiones sunt de Animo tantum;unde sit, qualis sit, quamdiu esse incipiat ... an aliundealio transeat et domicilium mutet, ad alias animalium formasconjectus ;an non amplius quam semel serviat et emissus,libertate sua usurus quum ex. . .quomodo vagetur in toto ;hac effugerit cavea ;an obliviscatur priorum et illic nosse seincipiat, postquam de corpore abductus in sublime secessit."Ep. xc. (Philosophy) ad beatum statum tendit :. . .qusesint mala quse videantur ostendit . . . totius Naturae, notitiamet suse tradit. Quid sint Dii qualesque . . . quid inferi . . .quid in secundam Numinum formam animae perpetuse, ubiconsistant, quid agant. . . . Hocejus initiamenta sunt, perquae non municipals sacrum, sed ingens omnium Deorumtemplum mundus iste, reseratur. . . . Ad initia deinde rerumredit, et ^Eternam Rationem toti inditam, et vim omniumseminum singula proprie figurantem. Turn de animo csepitinquirere unde esset, ubi, quamdiu.. . . Deinde a corporalibus

"""""""68 MARCUS AURELIUS""se ad incorporalia transtulit, Veritatemque et argumenta ejusexcussit. Nat. Qu. I. prcef." (Here the division betw. actioand contemplatiois called quae ad homines, quae ad deosAltiorspectat.")est haec et animosior : multum permisitsihi : non fuit oculis contenta. Majus esse quiddam suspicataest ac pulcrius quod extra conspectum JSTatura posuisset. . . .Altera docet quid in terris agendum sit, altera quid agatur incselo. . . .Supra hanc caliginem in qua volutamur excedit ettenebris ereptos illo perducit unde lucet. . . . Naturae Rerumgratias ago quum secretiora . ejus intravi . . . . quae Universimateria sit, quis auctor aut custos :. quid sit Deus : totusin se intendat an ad nos aliquando respiciat ; faciat quotidiealiquid, an semel fecerit ; pars Mundi sit, an Mundus ;liceatillihodieque decernere et ex lege Fatorum aliquid derogare ;an majestatis deminutio sit et confessio erroris, mutanda fecisse. . . Nisi ad haec admitterer, non fuerat nasci !note here that this passage approaches(We maynearer to our modernconceptions of Pure Theology than the subsequent physicalphenomena, in which centres the interest of the Nat. Qucestiones.")theoretical"Detrahe hoc inaestimabile bonum =science) "non est vita tanti. quam contempta res est homonisi supra humana surrexerit ! . ." The secondary and cath.artic value of moral purification is clearly put in a later section,"and would delight Aristotle and Porphyry: Virtus . . .magnifica non quia per se beatum est malo :caruisse, sed quiaanimum laxat ac prseparat ad cognitionem coelestium dignumqueefficit qui in consortium Dei veniat."(Morality, as a necessarystage to be transcended, and in itself only needful because ofthe body, which stands in the way of the yet pure unimpededenergy of the rational soul. In this half-Neoplatonic halfscientificemphasis on intellectualism, Seneca, if he is sincere,has a far more amiable outlook on the world than his twosuccessors. He can almost shelve the question of immortalityas unmeaning, so implicit is the notion of continued life in themastery of eternal truth. For example, do these words refer to

"""""THE WISE MAN" 69"this life or the next ? Tune consummatum habet plenumquebonum sortis humanae, quum calcato omni malo petit altumet in interiorem Naturae finem venit. Tune juvat intersidera ipsa vagantem, divitum pavimenta ridere," etc. (In thisscientific study of self and Nature, atheism is impossible. AsMarcus sees the absurdity of allowing man a reason deniedto the outer world, so Seneca.) Sunt qui putent sibi ipsisanimum esse et quidem providum ac dispensantem singula, etsua et aliena : hoc autem Universum, in quo nos quoquesumus, expers esse consilii, et aut ferri temeritate quadam autNatura nesciente quid faciat. Quani utile existimas istacognoscere 1 . . . quantum Deus possit 1 materiam ipse sibiformet an data utatur 1 . . .Deus, quicquid vult, efficiat, anin multis rebus ilium tractanda destituant, et a magno Artificeprave formentur multa 1 (Non quia cessat ars, sed quia id inquo exercetur ssepe inobsequens arti est.) Haec inspicere,hasc discere, his incubare, nonne transilire est mortalitatemsuam et in melioreni transcribi sortem? ... si nihil aliud,hoc certe sciam omnia angusta esse, mensus Deum ! Cons.ad Helv. 8 : "Animuscontemplator admiratorque Mundi, parsejus magnificentissima, propria nobis et perpetua, tamdiunobiscum mansura, quamdiu ipsi manebimus (where I believepropria, etc., to be neuters, including "mundus hie" before,the two things which, as subject and object, are correlativeand ever in our power). 9 : Dum oculi mei ab illo spectaculocujus insatiabiles sunt non abducantur, dum mihi lunamsolemque intueri liceat, dum ceteris inhserere sideribus, dumortus eorum occasus intervallaque et causas investigare velociusmeandi vel tardius. . . . Dum cum his sim et cselestibus, quahomini fas est, immiscear ;dum animum ad cognatarum rerumconspectum tendentem, in sublimi semper habeam :quantumrefert mea, quid calcem ? 11: (Lapides and aurum) non potestamare sincerus Animus ac naturae suae memor, levis ipse etexpers curae et quandoque emissus fuerit, ad summa emicaturus.Interim quantum per moras membrorum et hanc

""70 MARCUS AURELIUScircumfusam gravem sarcinam licet, celeri et volucri cogitationedivina perlustrat. . . liber et dis cognatusomnique sevo par. Animus . . . ipse sacer et ceternus est, etcui non possunt injici maims." Cons, ad Helv. 17 (Soul bestet omni mundowhen) animus omnis :cogitationis expers operibus suis vacat ;et modo se levioribus studiis oblectat, modo ad considerandamsuam Universique naturam, veri avidus insurgit. Terrasprimum situmque earum quserit ;deinde conditionem circumfusimaris, cursusque ejus alternos et recursus ;tune quicquidinter coelum terrasque plenum formidinis interjacet perspicit,et hoc tonitrubus fulminibus ventorum flatibus ac nimborumnivisque et graiidinis tumultuosum spatium: Turn peragratishumilioribus ad summa prorumpit, et pulcerrimo divinorumspectaculo fruitur, dZternitatisque suse memor, in omne quodfuit futurumque est omnibus seculis, vadit." Ot. Sap. 31 :Huic majori Reipublicas et in otio deservire possumus ;immovero nescio an in otio melius. . . . ut quceramus quidsit virtus 1. . . natura an ars bonos viros faciat ? unum sit hoc quod mariaterrasque . . . complectitur, an multa ejusmodi corpora Deussparserit? Continua sit omnis et plenamateria ... andiducta, et solidis inane permixtum sit? Deus sedens opussuum spectet, an tractet 1 utrumne extrinsecus illi circumfusussit, an toti inditus? immortalis sit Mundus an inter caducaet ad tempus nata numerandus ? Hsec qui contemplatur, quidDeo prsestat? ne tanta ejus opera sine teste sint. Solemusdicere, Summum Bonum esse secundum Naturam vivere :Natura nos ad utrumque genuit et contemplationi rerum etactioni."D. On Death and Immortality. In spite of this happyoutlook and vast pretensions, death appearing as but anunimportant episode in the theoretic life which opens thegate of Truth still wider, there are not wanting passages ofsceptical alternatives, of much perplexity about the continuedexistence of consciousness. Death becomes, then, as to thelater Stoic leaders, a debt to the universal order, rather than

"Nam"Nunc"""""THE WISE MAN" 71the Platonic emergence from bodily prison. Cons, ad Polyb.27 :si nullus defimctis sensus superest, evasit omniapater meus vitas incommoda in eum restitutus locum in ; quofuerat antequam nasceretur ; expers omnis mali nihil timet nihilcupit nihil potitur. ... Si est aliquis sensus ;nunc animusfratris mei velut ex diutino carcere emissus tandem sui juriset arbitrii gestit, et Rer. Naturae spectaculo fruitur et humanaomnia ex superiore loco despicit ;divina vero, quorum rationedtamdiu frustra quaesierat propius intuetur. . . . Aut beatus autnullus est : beatum deflere invidia est, nullum dementia."Ep.Ixxvi.:Si modo solutae corporibus animae manent felicior illisstatus restat, quam est dum versantur in corpore . . . contrafidem est feliciores esse liberis et in Universum datis clausas etobsessas." Cons, ad Marc. 19:"Cogita, nullis defunctum malisaffici. . . . Mors omnium dolorum et solutio est et finis . . .nos in illam tranquillitatem in qua antequam nasceremurjacuimus reponit nee potest miser esse qui nullus est.. . .Excessit filius tuus terminos intra quos servitur. Excepitilium magna et aeterna 26pax." (Marcias father consoles herfrom his place in "heaven) Nos : quoque felices animae etaeterna sortitaequum Deo visum erit iterum ista moliri =(destroy the world), labentibus cunctis, et ipsae parva ruinaeingentis accessio in antiqua elementa vertemur."Epist. xxiv. "Non sum tarn ineptus ut Epicurean! cantilenamhoc loco persequar nemo tarn puer est ut Cerberum. . .:timeat ! . . . Mors nos aut consumit aut exuit. Emissusmeliora restant, onere detracto ; consumptis nihil restat." Ep.Ixiii.:cogita omnia mortalia esse. . . . Cito nos eo perventurosquo ilium pervenisse maeremus. Et fortasse, si modosapientum verafama est" (cf. Tacit. Agric. last ) "recepitquenos locus aliquis, quern putamus perisse, praemissusest."Ep. Ixv. "Mors : quid est 1 aut finis aut transitus (Marcus//,Tcurri7i/at) in the same strain, Ep. Ixx.: : "Vis adversus hoccorpus liber esse !tanquam migraturus habita ; propone tibiquandoque hoc contubernio carendum." Then Ep. Ixxi., with

""""72 MARCUS AURELIUSa similar vein to Marcus musings on the need of death for thewhole : Nobis solvi perire est . . . fortius finem sui suorumquepateretur, si speraret omnia ilia sic in vitam mortemqueper vices ire, et composita dissolvi, dissoluta :componi in hocDei verti." cii.. . .opere aeternam artem cuncta temperantisAgain with confident eloquence"Quum venerit dies ille qui:mixtum hoc divini humanique secernat, corpus hoc ubi inveni:relinquam ipse me Diis reddam. Per has mortalis sevimoras illi meliori vitae longiorique proluditur ... in aliumNaturae maturescimus partum, alia origo nos exspectat; aliusrerum status. . . ." Then with almost Christian rapture andascetic fervour :"Veniet qui te revelet dies,et ex contuberniofoedi atque olidi ventris educat. Hinc nunc quoque tuquantum potes, subvola :utique etiam necessariis qusecohaerebunt alienus. . . . Dies iste quern tanquam extremumreformidas, ceterni natalis est Aliquando Naturae tibi! . . .arcana retegentur, discutietur ista caligo. Imaginare tecum. . .quantus ille sit fulgor tot sideribus inter se lumen miscentibus !Quid tibi videbitur divina lux quum illam suo locovideris ? In the last resort, as we see from a certainly sincerestatement, he falls back on popular belief ;and while Philosophy may have inspired those magnificent hopes of a homeamong the Stars, it clearly has not strengthened its proof :Quum de Animarum JSternitate disserimus, non levemomentum apud nos habet consensus hominum."I conclude with a somewhat lengthy quotation, stillrhetorical, yet perhaps the most striking of any, and recallingclearly the fundamental note of pessimism in a reflectiveantiquity (TOV ^vvra Opyvew, etc. Dio : Chrysostoms Charidemus)Si velis credere altius veritatem intuentibus, omnis:vita Supplicium est""In hoc profundum inquietumque projecti mare .. . nunquamstabili consistimus loco . . . nullus portusnisi mortisest. Ne itaque invideris fratri tuo ; quiescit, tandem liber,tandem tutus, tandem ceternus est. Fruitur nunc aperto et

""Non""THE WISE MAN" 73libero ccelo : ex humili atque depresso in eum emicuit locum,quisquis ille est, qui solutas vinculis animas beato recipitsinu ! Et nunc libere vagatur omniaque Rerum Naturae bonanon perdidit lucemcum summa voluptate perspicit. Erras !frater tuus sed securiorem sortitus est. Omnibus illo nobiscommune est iter. Quid fata deflemus 1 non reliquit ille nos,sed antecessit."""E. The Cosmopolisand man s special function;or theproblem of the Two Natures. Cons. ad. Marc. 18: "Puta,nascenti me tibi venire in consilium : Intratura es urbem dishominibusque communem omnia complexam certis legibusseternisque devine tarn, indefatigata coelestium officia volventem"(followed by a list of Nature s wonders written with evidentappreciation). Ot. Sap. 31. (The greater Commonwealthhas the more serious claims.) "DuasRespublicas animocomplectimur, alteram magnam et vere publicam qua Diiet homines continentur; in qua non ad hunc angulumrespicimus (yowSiov), sed terminos Civitatis nostrce cum solemetimur."Ep. xxviii.:sum uni angulo natus ; patria mea totus:Magna et generosa res esthie est Mundus." Ep. cii. "Animus ;nullos sibi poni nisi communes et cum Deo terminospatitur. . . . Illi patria est, quodcunque suprema et universacircuitu suo cingit."2. Great emphasis on the peculiarity of endowment, ofend, and therefore of perfection (= happiness). Ep. Ixxvi.:Omnia suo bono constant ; vitem fertilitas commendat,sapor vinum, velocitas cervum. ... Id in quoque optimumest, cui nascitur, quo censetur : in homine quid optimum ?Ratio : hac animalia antecedit, Deos sequitur.. . Homini.suum bonum Katio est; si hanc perfecit, laudabilis est, etfinem natures suce attigit.Hsec Ratio perfecta, Virtus vocatureademque honestum est." (So these four words are interchangeable, like God, fate, chance, Nature : thethegood,"Highest End, Virtue, Reason; and as there isnothing in

"""""""""""74 MARCUS AURELIUSthe objective world but God, so within there is only thegood will which is to be accounted of. (Ep. xcii. "Ratio:vero diis hominibusque communis; hsec in illis consummataest, in nobis consummabilis.") Ep. cxxi. "Dicitis, inquit:(Epicurus is objecting) omne animal primum constitutioni suce"conciliari (Marcus KaraorKevrj) homines autem;constitutionemrationalem esse,"etc. Ep. cxxiv. "(Bonum) hoc quod:secundum naturam cujusqueest."Ep. xli. :(Jin.)"Lauda inipso quod nee eripi potest nee dari ; quod proprium est hominis.Quseris quid sit? Animus et Ratio in animo perfecta. . . .Consummate itaque ejus bonum si id adimplevit cui nascitur.Quid est autem quod ab illo Ratio haec exigit rem ? facillimamsecundum naturam suam vivere."(See below, Cons, ad Helv.8, Propria virtus.)F. Traces found of a Personalist conception of Deity :Seneca treats all names for the ultimate forces as synonyms, andconvertible (though he might be puzzled to put Fortunain her right place as a mere attribute of the Supreme, as theunaccountable operations of Providence seen from the pointof view of accidents). There is no need to multiply evidenceof his ample identification. But one or two passages areinteresting. Cons, ad Helv. 8 (How little the exile loses !) :duo qu8B pulcerrima sunt, quocunque nos moverimus, sequentur: Natura communis et propria virtus. Id actum est mihicrede ab illo quisquis formator Universi fuit, sive ille Deusest potens omnium sive incorporalis Ratio ingentium operumartifex sive divinus Spiritus, per omnia, maxima, minima,sequali intentione diffusus, sive Fatum et immutabilis causaruminter se cohserentum series . . . ut in alienumarbitrium, nisi vilissima, non caderent."Ep. xvi. To an objector, who not without cause complainsthat Reason s only benefit is to assure us of our slavery :Quid mihi prodest Philosophiasi Fatum est 1 ... si Deusrector est? ... si casus .imperaU. . Mutari certa nonpossunt :si aut consilium meum Deus occupavit, decrevitque

""THE WISE MAN" 75"quid facerem, aut consilio meo nil Fortuna permittit. Quicquidest ex his (decides Seneca no less than Marcus) vel siomnia hsec sunt, philosophandum est : Sive nos inexorabililege ista constringunt, sive arbiter Deus universi cunctadisponit, sive casus res humana sine ordine impellit et jactat,philosophia nos tueri debet. Haec adhortabitur ut Deolibenter pareamus, ut Fortunes contumaciter resistamus."With which curious yet vague division of the realmof objective Nature and human experience, a completeManichean dualism, we will take leave of Seneca.

PART IITHE IMMEDIATE INFLUENCE:EPICTETUSCHAPTER IEPICTETUS, OR THE NEW CYNISM ; DEVOTIONALPERSONIFICATION OF THE COSMIC ORDER(A) THE EELIGIOUS TRANSFOKMATION OF PHILOSOPHICDOGMAANALYSISNew devoutness towards a personal god; Cynic missionary sent toall classes with Gospel tidings; egoistic idealism or indifferenceof Buddhist; in Epict. two opposite tendencies (1) sympathy;(2) hermit isolation ; Individualism (the will alone being free} ;this is all that God could bestow on His children (omnipotencelimited) ; mystic communion.IN Epictetus, a new phase passes over Stoicism. AsSt. Paul to Philo of Alexandria, so isEpictetus ofPhrygia to Seneca of Eome. By the very urgencyof personal needs, of devotional requirements, the conception of an all-embracing Force, indifferent to theparticular and too abstract to be the object of prayer or7 6

"""""THE NEW CYNISM 77reverence, is transformed into the old traditional Zeus,father of gods and men." Without doubt it is in thisnovel religious earnestness and unction that the studentdetects the most significant feature. The Sage, moreof a Cynic than a Stoic in principle, has a wider missionthan the Imperial Minister : he is sent to all men witha kind of missionary consecration, to live in their sightthe perfect life of happiness and peace. He is there,before their eyes, like some later Stylite of the East,or Western hermit ;set apart, indeed, from men andhuman pursuits, yet in a very real sense their guide,comforter, and counsellor. How easy and how accessiblewas salvation ! To him come wandering seekers aftertruth, with troubled consciences, or restless desires, vagueand unsatisfied aspirations after an ideal. When Seneca,with less comprehensive sympathy, speaks only to directa friend, Epictetus, knowing no caste, no restrictions inthe human brotherhood, welcomes all without prejudice ;one instance only being shown where, as Socrates underdemonic dissuasion, he found himself unable to conversewith an applicant, because there was no sort of commonagreement on which to base discussion or appeal. Notthat this new interest in men as individuals recognizesas yet the special endowmentof each as the startingpoint.The ideal is still man as the organ of impersonal Reason no; longer the aristocratic reserve ofan intellectual confraternity, but the ascetic reserve ofquietism, no less narrow. We must not look here forthe Christian conception of society, varying according tothe ability, equipment, opportunity of each constituentin a hierarchy of function and usefulness, finding aplace for the burning devotee, the cold scholastic, thetaciturn recluse, the eloquent friar, the high-born lady,

""""""""78 MARCUS AURELIUSthe lay brother at his menial task. The outlook ofantiquity outside a restricted yet intense patriotism wassingularly cramped. Although it was seen quite earlythat the motive alone counts, that it is the inwardtemper only which ennobles or degrades the outwardact, no use was made of this fruitful thought. AsAnaxagoras disappointed Socrates in his use of vovs,so we find the suggestive maxim irawra viroKy-fy^ leading, not to the illumination of the phenomenal, of thecircumstance of life, but rather to an egoistic Idealism,which denied or disregarded the concrete, to Sophisticsubjectivity, to pure Buddhistic indifference. The busyand conventional activity of an average citizen wasabhorrent to reflexion. The philosopher, especiallyafter the death of Socrates, turned away from theflamboyance and diversity (7roi/ci\la) of the Helleniccharacter to meditate upon the One, and exchangeeagerness for a passive role.The old contempt for the handicrafts (natural enoughin a slave-holding community engrossed in civic feuds)tended to increase, and to include in the same condemnation, not merely all artistic endeavour, but eventhe more formal political duties of active life. Thephilosophic ideal was a perpetual straining after a moreperfect existence but to the ; very last it remainedempty of all positive content, a blank luminousdisc rather than a well-rounded sphere (icvfcXorepr)?afyalpos), bearing witness to the despondence and earlydiscouragement, not to the vitality or fortitude, of theGreek mind. It was purely negative,ifyou like,feminine and could; only issue, in spite of professions of cosmopolitan sympathy, in abstention andresignation.

""No"""THE NEW CYNISM 79In Epictetus two opposite tendencies contend for themastery, and their struggleand his effort at reconciliation add to the pathos of his character and teaching.All men to him are brothers, sons of a common parent,God Himself; and it is in this transcendental affinitythat he discovers a sanction for those peculiarly humanvirtues, kindness, consideration, forbearance, whichseem at first sight so incongruous in any creature.For the sympathetic instinct is there, unquestionably ;the most puzzling problem of philosophy is to rationalize,to justify it ; and, to speak frankly, from the standpointof Stoic materialism this was impossible. Yet Epictetus,though he be a father confessor, has no special casuistryto apply to the several needs of his applicants. He hasbut one formula, one prescription for the cure of souls.The formula, too, sounds to us strange in the mouth ofan apostolic teacher. It is, Physician, heal thyself !1No one can do anything for another. Our sympathy,our appeals, good offices, kindly services, only play aboutthe surface, and never touch the deep-seated evil of thesoul. man may deliver his brother, nor makeagreement unto God for him." Virtue, like the knowledge of the Sophist, is incommunicable, although wemay reverently repeat the Socratic text Si&a/crbv 97apery. The missionary can only remind his hearer ofhis absolute and immediate power to be wise, happy,1Even this sympathy is strictly against nature, which, in spite of theco-ordination of the parts, forms of each creature an impenetrable monad,immersed only in his special but selfish function, and with no legitimateend but self-culture: "You must not be angry with wrong-doers"(Teubner, 61, ILvQputre, 8e1ei <reirapa <J>v<rivCTTL rots aXXorpiois KO.KOISdiarldecrda.!. A^ei avrbv /xaXXov ?) ^tVet). Their conduct has nothing to dowith you ; and, in a choice of two evils, the less culpable affection of thesoul is pity, for it is less disturbing.

"""8oMARCUS AURELIUSand free, his inalienable prerogative of instantaneousconversion, in spite of the long coils of evil habits, neverforfeited. He can speak warmly, with fervour, unction,assurance, of the grace of the Sonship,"to be had forthe asking. One simple article of faith sufficed ;thatthe will alone is free and self-sufficing ;that all outwardthings, our own poor bodily framework included, cannever be under our control, and are thus indifferent andimmaterial to our happiness. As in Aurelius, theretends to be a divisionbetween inexorable Fate and theprovident gods, dispensers ofin a true sense objects of worship. No scientific interpretationbenefits, who alone can beof the world can ever calm the individual sanxiety or satisfy his sense of justice. God Himselfsinks into a subordinate place, as the Platonic Demiurge ;He is limited in power by a law or destiny anterior toHim. His goodnessis saved by limiting His authority ;and we gladly exchange an unintelligible omnipotencefor the more human faculty of merciful contrivance,which brings Him nearer our level, within the scopeof our comprehension.If this almighty poweris in theory conceded, asin the Christian system,it is at once circumscribed by avoluntary abdication, which leaves room for the realityand distinct coexistence of persons, and for the usefulness of moral effort. If these distinctions are allowedto evaporate in the night of the Absolute,it seemsthere is no further need of energy in search or action ;nothing but the speculative self-introspection of a Deityat last awake in man, and contemplating the results ofhis unconsciouslabours with some amazement and considerable pain. Epictetus, with his practical motive andreligious sentiment, never hesitates a moment. God has

"""""""God""""""THE NEW CYNISM 81given us all He possibly can He could do no more.;He could not put all things under our feet," give usdominion (as the worthy Hebrew said in his gratitudefor tangible blessings) over the works of His hands."The Divine Beingis aof Sorrows," pathetic instillness and helplessness: itappeals to us to keepholy and undefiled," untarnished, and in undimmedlustre, that tiny luminous jewel within us which is partof itself. In reaction against the grossness and unspiritualityof Stoic teaching, the vague devotionalismwhich we call the mystical spirit has spread widelysince Seneca. Latent there and disguised by rhetoric,these pious aspirations to overcome the world of oppositesand distinctions have now become the sum andcentre of the Neo-Cynic creed. The fatherhood of God,the brotherhood of man, such is the staple and substance of the Gospel which (as Kenan tells us) willnever grow And old."yet, after this plausible commonplace, in this reputed commonwealth of the Universe, suchatomic isolation and reciprocal repulsion! Such immurement of the individual in the narrow prison-house of hisconsciousness ! Such disappointing barriers to a largerand more vigorous sympathy! Such natural evanescenceor discouragement of corporate action Such oppressive!despondency in the thought that, after all, God is outof place in an alien world, like the wise man whofollows in His footsteps: He came unto His own, andHis own received Him not! Such wistful adherenceagainst hope to the one sheet-anchor of moral instinct,and to that one dogma which in Marcus will absorb allother articles of faith, that God is in us,not, indeed,reconciling,"the world to Himself," but the individualsoul in a blissful and indissoluble union !6

""""""82 MARCUS AURELIUS() THE GIFT OF FREE WILL THE FATHERHOOD OF;GOD ;THE DIVINITY OF SOULS ;THE COSMO-POLIS";THE SPECIAL FUNCTION1. With increasing knowledge, with heightenedactivity of the State, our realm of freedom, of one sHow much of that weown,"shrinks to nothingness.once regarded as essential part of our personal self didwe discover to be the resultant of influences that cross,confirm, or resist one another within us ! Withinnarrower and ever narrower proportions shrank that inus, which we could really call our own. One part thebodily organs claimed as their contribution, anotherfell beneath the general psychic forces, which, by nomerit of their own, work according to identical laws inall individuals. The tiny sphere alone, that which isruled and shaped by the freedom of our moral action,seemed to afford an asylum to our Eeal Self (Lotze,Mikrokosmus, i. 1).If I may be allowed to quote froman earlier volume of my own :The entire aim ofpost -Aristotelian thought had been to set the personalspirit free of all earthly hindrance and encumbranceto concentrate thought upon itself. But in proportionas this effort was successful, and the Spirit releaseditself from all that was not germane to its true life,the realm of alien things loomed larger and larger,because ever more threatening and hostile. Suchsacrifice had enriched the power of the enemy, andimpoverished the territory of the man, struggling ina vain pretence of freedom against overwhelming odds(School of Plato, Bk. iv. ch. iv. 3). This free will,ineffective beyond itself, was God s best gift to man,indeed his very self. It rose like a small point of rock

""f\piv"THE NEW CYNISM 83from the midst of the waters, which submerged everything else. It is the centre, not only of individual life,but of an entire scheme of anthropology. It was free,because God its giver and parent was free. It washere, not to act but to contemplate. Within it lay thegood and ill of life ; good, if it exercised its sovereignrights ; ill, if it allowed itself to become perverted, andmistook obstinacy for principle. It was amenable tono power or influence but its own ;and to convertanother is only to suggest,and let the lesson work itsway in for no man may deliver his brother." In:this supreme gift, a portion of Himself, God hadexhausted His bounty. He could give us nothing morethat was not the mere sport of chance and circumstance. The body, covered with opprobrious epithets,dissolved partnership with this proud yet ineffectualmonad :just as the world (in spite of appeal to takeeverything as sent by God s goodness and mercy) hadreally slipped from the control of Deity.5.&o~7rep ovv rfv afyov, TO KpaTicrrov diravTcav K.tcvpievov of Oeol e<j>jioVoy eiroirfdav^ TTJV ^prfaLVrrjv bpdr)V r. fyawraerials, ra S aXX* OUK S6<J>rj[uv. *Apdye on ov/c ijOe\ov ; eye* fjiev BOKCO ori el rjSuVaj Toav i]\uv eTrerpe-^ravd\\a Trdvra)^ OUK fjSuVa^To, eVlyap ovras K. o-co/^ari, o-vvSeSe/JLevovs TOIOVTU* K.TOLOVTOi? 7TO)? ol6v T T)V 66? 7dVTa V7TO TWV e/CTO? fJ,7)fifiroS%e<r0at, ; What saith Zeus ?Epictetus,if ithad been possible, I would have made thy body of thissubstance free and unhindered. But let it not escapethee, all this is not thine, but mud artfully kneaded.Since I could not do this, I gave thee a part of us(/zepo? TIfjperepov), this Sovereign power of willingand not willing, that uses impressions. If thou wilt

a>84 MARCUS AURELIUSguard this carefully and place in it all that is thine,thou shalt never be stopped, never be hindered, but bealways free from groan, reproach, never have need tofawn on another. What then ? do these gifts seem tothee trivial ? ... art satisfied with these ?218. "Mybrother has more than his share of thefield." Let him, as much as he will. MtfTI ovv TOVT. Trto-roO, pr) TI TOV <f)t,\a8e\<j)ov ; e/cjap TTJS oiWa? T/9 SvvaTat, K/3a\eiv ; ov$ oZev<$. ovBe yap rjOeXrjcrev aXA, cir* ejjioia I/TO eTroiijcrevK. eSco/cev olov ^X^v auros dKwXuroi/ dfamyKao-Toi/ aTrapaTro-&I,<TTOV.(Cf. Kufus in the Eclogues of Stobceus, ii. 8 :TO tcd\\i<TTov . . . cS Srj K. avros evSai/jicov e.)So 130. Tt? el;. . .avOpcoiros, rovr e. ovSev e^covfcvpiwrepov irpoaipecrect)?,a\\a ravrr) ra d\\a VTTOrerayfjieva,avrrjv & dSouXeuroj K. avvTroratcTOv.310. ^(749 Oappwv. Tlvi ; /JLOVM Oappelv ev^e^e-Tttt, TO) TTKTTq)Tft) aKwXuTW Tto aKCKJXUpeTW, TOVT 6. TTfTrpoaipe&eL rfjaavrov.330. TL fJLOi$e$(0K6V 6JLLOV K. aVT6% OVCTLOV /Tl; ra Trpoaiperifcd n*oi Se8a)/cey, eir1 CJaKwXura. To crw/ita TO TrrjKwovvirera^ev ovv rfj r(ov r/ O\cov361. o o Zevs OVK, rjSvvijOrj TTOtija aL . .avQp. Trelaai Tiva e. dy. K. icaicd. Mr) yapTOVTO ; eiceivo IJLOVOV aoi SeSorai, cravrbv Trelo ai.7ra>9 ebvvaroSeSoTai <TQI256. IIpoaipe<riv yap ovbev SvvaTai KwXGo-ai r) /SXa-v/rat. . . el prj avrr) eavrrjv. (So Encheir. 48 : <tXoVo(o9Traaav<*>fye\eiav K. /3\dftrjv ef eavrov TrpocrBoKa.) So92. So 193 :Hpoaipecriv ri einrobi^ew irefyvicev,dirpoaiperov ovSev avrrj 8 eavrrjv Siaarpafalaa.270. Uft)9 ovv TL d^fAiToSio-Toi Gival n Svvarai r&vTOV (ra)fwiT09 / 7ra>9/Lteya, 7j d^o\oyov TO (f)va-i ve/cpbv

""TJJUJ"""THE NEW CYNISM 8577 yfj 6 7777X05 ; TI ovv ; ovSev e^ere eXeuOepoy . . . KOIrt? vfjia<; dva/Kdarei SVVCLTCU TO>(rwyKaTaOeaOai tyevSei. . .q) ; ev6d$ ovv opare on, e. n ev vfuv(ftvoei. TaKaiTTtopoi, TOVTO etfepyd^eaOe, TOVTOV^e, evravOa fyreire TO dyaOov.TOVT8174. oi/Ve TrXoOro ? e. c4>01;^ vyieia . . . TT\TJVTOVT aKwXuToy fyvaei,Let others look to their principles (395, 396)e^a>r/i/t /ie 8e? dpeaiceivrivi vTrorerd^dai,. . . TO>eie/ceivos arvveo-Trjcrev efjiavrw K. TTJV efirjvCJJLO! fxoi w, Sou? KCLVOVCLS 6? XPV cri/vThis a/one is in the strictest sense good ;compare Kant s famous exordium: (32) *Av /JLOV TrvvOdvyTi e.dyaOov TOV dvOp. OVK e%a) croi aXXo elirelv on77Troid Trpoalpeo-w. All else isaXkorpia and under aliencontrol, 1 but on this, even though the tyrant say, Iwill show you who is master," he has no real hold.(65) "670)aoi, Set fo) on Kvpios eifju,"TloOev <rv; fj,e6 Zevs eXeuOepo* d<|>TJKM.*H 8o/fet? on e/xeXXez/ TOV I&LOVvibv edv KaraBov\ovcr6ai ; TOV ve/cpov Be JJLOV Kvpios el,\dfte avTov. Here are all the striking features of laterStoicism :contempt of body, complete abandonment ofall externals to the Temporal power (for strangelyenough the reign of Fortune, so constant a theme forSeneca s eloquence, is here forgotten), and the completeexemption of this one small point from other laws,physical or social.2. This last quotation will lead us imperceptiblyto the second point in the Epictetan estimate of man,The Fatherhood of God a ; vague pietistic doctrine,1 This summary dismissal of the foreign and alien in our lives is theleading doctrine of Epictetus, and appears with unceasing assurance.

""""86 MARCUS AURELIUSengrafted on the early materialism of the Porch bya natural alliance in Rome with practical endeavour,with primitive instinct, with religious belief. Socrates,who from a formal standpointismerely the author ofdefinition and generalisation, is, in the history of thought,notable rather for his recall of exiled gods, his unfeignedinterest in others, his superstitious belief in a specialmonitor, a special mission. Epictetus, in similar fashion,mitigates the coldness of unchanging law by the warmthof allegoric language ; which, though it baffles analysisand iswholly inconsistent with the rest of his creed,nevertheless represents a sincere, ifvague, conviction,the triumph of Faith over Reason. From a recognitionthat God is our Father in a special sense, he believesall else will follow. 13. EL rt? ra>Soyfjuari,TOVTO)KCLT a^iav Svvairo on yeyovapev UTTO TOU 0eouTrpoyyov/Jievcos K. 6 Oeos irar^p e. rcov r dv6p. K.Oewv, such an one will entertain no ignoble thoughtabout himself (dyevves, Taireivov). If Caesar adoptyou, who could stand your intolerable pride1 av 8eQTL rov Aids ulos7i>ftk el, OVK e7rap6r)<rr) ; continuesHein a strangely ascetic Platonic manner :errel&i) 8voravTa ev rfj <yeve(rei TUL&V eyKarafjue/jLiKTai,, TO acofjuaKOLVOV Trpo? raci>a, o Xo^o? 8e K. yvcd/jLTj KOIVOV Trpo?6eov$, a\\ot, jjiev eVl ravrrjv aTrofchivovai rrjv cruyyeve(.a.v rrjvdrux? K. v<LK.pa.\>, o\iyot 8e Tti^e? eVt rrjv Qciav K. fjuatcapiav.So 33. The truly wise learns that this universe isTO crucrT?7/xa TO ef dvOp. K. Oeov, and that from Himcome all seeds, et? anravra pev TO. eVl 7779 yevvaifjievd reK. (f>v6fJL6Va, TTpOTjryOVIAeVGDS 8 t? TO, Xo^i/Ca, OTt KOlVtoVelv^Qvov ravra Trefyvicedew TU> TT)? crvvavacrTpcKJifjs/cardTOV \6yov e7ri7reTr\6Yfj,eva, why not call such anone Koo-fuov ;8ta rl fir)vibv TOU OeoG; Shall not this

opfyavovs"""THE NEW CYNISM 87sense of son ship take away all our pain, if affinity toan earthly Caesar makes one arrogant? (Juvenal s "tumidumqueNerone propinquo TO Se TOV Sebv")e%eivK. irarepa K. /crjo efjLovaovKen rjfiasXVTTMV K. $6l3a)v ; No student of human history, quiteapart from religious conviction, will doubt the absoluteefficacy of such an assurance for a life of heroic effortand martyrdom but in our author it is an unwarrant;able "poetic licence," or an accretion on Stoic Positivism.49. When you get hotter water than you wantedfrom your servant, or find the fire is out, and there snone to be had, you say: Uw5ovv TI<$dvdo"^r)TaiTO>VTOCOVTCOV ; AvSpdtroSov, ovrc dve%r) TOV do e\(f)ov TOVcravTOV, 05 e^ei TOV Aia irpoyovov, w&Trep ulos efcavTwv o-TrepfJuaTdov yeyove K. T?}? avTfjs avwOev(cf. St. John i. 12, 13, iii. 7), ov pefjivrfo-rjdSeX^wy <j>uo-t,T L el K.; QTL o~vyyevS)v }on OTI TOVHe sweeps aside the next pretext of absoluteownership with magnificent indignation and contemptfor the material fabric and social conventions, But Ibought him with my own Domoney." you see whereyou are looking To ? earth, to this pit of confusion, tothese miserable legal fictions of dead men, not to theeternal laws of heavenly ordinance !(efc TVJV yrjv, et?TO /3dpa0pov, el? TOV? Ta\ai7ra>povsTOUTOU? I oyu.ou? TOU?TCOP ve/cpwv, eh Se TOV<; T&V 6ewv ov /QXeVets). Hercules,through his life, spent in perpetual toil and exile, wasnever anxious about his children. 289: ov o-Tevwv ovSeiroOtov ovSct>?a^iet? 1 rjSei yapOTI ovSefa e.dvdp. op^avos, d\\a irdvTwv del K. Snyveicws 6 riar^p e.o KT)86p.vos. For to Hercules it was no mere report ortheoretic belief that Zeus was the father of men (pe^pl\6yov...) 05 ye K. avTOv Harepa O^-TO avTov K. etca\ei K.}

""""88 MARCUS AURELIUS7T/309 eKelvov a<f)opwv errparrev a eirpaTrev. And therefore,in and through this consciousness, he could alwayslive happily (Travra^ov e^ijv avra) Sidyew evScupova)?}.For our father has made us for happiness; it is ourown fault if we put not our hand to the fruit hangingwithin our reach, av &e rt? TI^, (287) fjiepvrjaoOTI Trap avTOv aTV%el. *O yap Oeo? TrdvTas dvOp. em TOeuSaijJLom^, eVl TO evaraBelv eiroujaey. 311. With superbfaith, like the Psalmist, Yet saw I never the righteousforsaken, nor his seed begging their bread." O#To>9 o060? dfjieXel rwv avrov eirirevyfidTcov. . . SICIKOVCOV . . .ol? nbvois XpfJTCu irapaSeiyfiao-iv TT/OO? TOU?on K. eari,tc. /caXa)9 &ioitcei TCL 6\a K. ov/cTCOV dv6p(DTTivtov TTpayfjLaTwv, K. OTL dvftpl dyaOo)"ovbev e. KCLKOV, ovre ^GOVTI OUT d jroOavovrL,= thatis, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligentlyseek Him (Heb. xi. 6). What, when He gives themno food, and allows them to starve 1&>9Yes, dya6bs(TTpaTTjybs TO dva/c\r]TiKov fioi aea^fjiay/cev TreiOofjuai,dKo\ov6o), eTrevcfrrjfjitovrbv rjye/jbova, vfjivwv avrov raepya. But the analogyisincomplete and unconvincing :a common peril, a common purpose unites the generalwith his soldiers, nay, a common justice, which allows nofavourites, and exposes all in turn to a like personaldanger but the Stoical Deity has no purpose, runs;no danger himself, and maintains no correspondencebetween desert and recompense. The philosophic Exemplar is now Diogenes, the nearest approach to the WiseMan, as yet undiscovered he has superseded Socrates:in popular reverence for saints. 338. He has becomea supreme type of holiest ascetic renunciation (but itis the ready sacrifice of limbs by the Star-fish, andTolstoian non-resistance to vile): andHethis because the

"THE NEW CYNISM 89is meanpresent life, with its kinship and association,inglessto him. El Trjs KTrjaews eVeXa/Sou, avrrjvd(f>fJKevdv crot pd\\ov rj f]KO\ov6r)o~ev Bi avTtjv. Sowith leg or whole body (cr/ceXo? . . . crw^dnov), nay,acquaintances, friends, fatherland : "HSet TroOev e%et,K.irapd TWOS K. eVt TIQ-IV \a/3a)v.Toi><?fiev yTTpOyOl/OUS TOl)? 0OUS K. TT]V TO) OVTi TTaTplBci Ovav eytcaTe\i7rev, KT\.3. Souls, then,sons of gods,"are particles ofDeity, and God knows and sympathises with their everymovement; how could it be otherwise? 50, 51: al^rv^al fjiev ovrcos e. evfteBe/jLevat,K. TO> Sewo-uya<j>etsare aurou fiopia ovcrai K. dirocnrdajjiaTa, Travrb? S* avrutvKt,vr)iiaTO<sare oiKeiov K.orv^vov^o @eo? ala-Odverai. . .eirirpoTTov eKaara) TrapearTjo-ev TOV efcdarov AatjxomK. TrapeSwfce (frvXacraeLV . . . K. TOVTOV dfcoifjiTjTOv K.d7rapa\6yL(TTov. 52. When ye shut the doors andcreate darkness within, jjuefjivrjaOe fjLTjSe jroTe \eyeiv onfiovoi eVre* ov yap eare a\V 6 0e6 evbov e. K. 6 ufxereposScupoj earw. It is curious to note, in the metaphorsused of this central power, will, or conscience, thevacillation between the helplessness of a sacred chargeand the sternness of a divine monitor ;in Aurelius, itis rather we who have to keep the inner idol of theshrine clean and unspotted, than expect guidance fromthe voice. 122 : OVK e^co TOV Hav-ny ecrw, TOV elpqKOTa/JLOI, Tr)v ovalav TOV dy. K. TOV KCIKOV ; what use, then,to me of birds or of entrails ? The notion of God hasreally receded into the purest atmosphere of Idealism,and has left the realm of created things: it is no longera Pantheism of Nature, but only of Thought. Tl ovv;OVK eVrt Oe&v epya Kaiceiva;ZGTIV, dTOC ov Trpovjyov/jLevaovBe fj^pY] Oewv. 2v Be TrpoyyovfAevov el, av diroairacrfia el

""90 MARCUS AURELIUSTOV Seov e%erus ev <ravT(fAeposeicelvov . . . ovtcon, Oeov 7/?e(efc9,Oeov ryvfJLvdfas ; Oeov7Xa9 K. d<yvoels! . . . avTov TOV Oeov irapovTOS eacoOevK.efyopwvTos TrdvTd K. eiraicovovTos, are you notashamed to think and do what you would not dareto, before his image in the !Temple w dvala-OrjTe 7779aavTov (frvcrecos\(cf. 156, 157, where Trapafco\ovOelvTO* SIOIKOVVTI ra 6\a iscoupled with eicelvov ev aavraj7repL(f)epet,v).What precise meaning can be attached tothe notion isimpossible to define ;sometimes theDeity within is a sort of burnished silver idol ;sometimes a guardian angel with plenary powers some;times an insulted and forgotten sovereign sitting apartin a palace where rebels carouse. 373. The Soul isthe true man; d7rovel/j,ov Kav ro>o\i<yov %p6vov aavrovHyefjiovifco) ffKe^jrai rl TTOT e^et9 TOVTO K. iroQtv e\rjXu96s,... if all your time be given to externals (ra e/cros)you will keep this squalid and neglected (pvirapov K.4. This doctrine of the essential kinshipof manwith God in a highly spiritual sense, leads naturallyto the doctrine of the COSMOPOLIS, and man s duty asa subordinate part of a great whole. 117. If youare a separate entity, detachable from the rest (a?ro-\VTOV), by all means live your own life ;el $6 <&?...jiepos "O\ou TWOS crKoirels, Si exelvo TO "O\ov vvvKaOrjfcei,. . . TrXevaai, . . . KaL . . .rrpo upas aTroOavelv Ti ovv. . . TL yap e. avOpwrros ; fxepos iroXews 77/^067779 /J^ev 7779K Oe&v K. dv0pa)7ra)v /J,eTaTavTa Se 7779ft>9eyyiaTa\e<yofjbewris, 777^9 e.piKpov 7779 0X779 ^ifJi n^a. 131.rioXtTT)s el TOV Koo-fxou K. jxepos avTov, ov% ev TOOV vTrrjpe-TIKCOV d\\a TWV 7rpo7]yov/ji.evc0v. . . T/9 ovv e7ra<yye\la

""THE NEW CYNISM 91v6%iv ISla crv^epov, Trepl fj,rj$evo<s{3ov\eveo-0ai to? dir<5\uTOk. This due to your power ofrationally following the divine ordering (irapaicoXov-OTJTIKOS TT) Beta bioucrjo-ei K. TOV efrj? eTrikoyiimKos).If foot or hand had reason (Af^oy-to?), they would neverdesire or aim except in reference to the welfare of thewhole body (^ eiraveveyKovTes eirl TO r O\ov). If thetrue gentleman knew the future (so well speak ourphilosophers), would have "he co-operated in his ownillness and death and mutilation," knowing that dirbTr)? T&V f/ O\(0v Starafeft)? TOVTO dirove^eTat,, KVpiwrepovSe TO f/ O\ov TOV fAepovs K. j] TroXts" TOV TToXiTou. We maynote, first, that it is hard to distinguish a very properresignation to the inevitable from a culpable negligenceor indifference to ordinary preventive measures ;so inmodern India, to adopt means to control plague orfamine is to oppose the Will of God ; second, thathere we have full-fledged that tyrannical Eealism, thesuperiority of whole to part, of abstract to concrete, ofname to thing, which will dominate a certain phaseof semi-mystical thought throughout mediaeval times ;thirdly, how comforting was the sense of being a portionof God, and how very discouragingis the sense of beingalso a part of a physical universe, which isemphasisedhere ! the one thoughtall radiance and peace andloving acquiescence ;the other, all harshness andcallous expediency. The end justifies the means ;theindividual isnothing ;the agentis a mere instrument :and this in the interests of the higher morality! butclearly an ethical relation implies a personal object.Sometimes Epictetus (who, we must remember, is underno contract or obligation to be consistent) seeks tounite the two aspects, by dwelling on the absoluteness

""""92 MARCUS AURELIUSand arbitrary power of God, as a master of slaves, as inthe Gospel, "takingleave of his servants." 264. Ina well-regulated household no one may suddenly say tohimself,I oughtto be steward;el Se /jurj, eTncrrpa-<et9/cvpios <ro/3a/3co9 Siaraaffofjitevov,e\Kva-as erepev The Lord turned and looked uponhim,"as he is beating his fellow-servants, and cut himasunder," appointing him his due portion), OVTW yiveraiK. ev rfi jj,eyd\r} ravrr) PloXei kart yap Tt9 K. ev6d&e/caara Siardo-acov, giving to each their roleoUoSeo-iroTTjs(which Plato left to the prenatalchoice of mortals,#eo?dvalrios), somewhat unwisely for a professed Theodicy.You be the sun ; you, again, a heifer, when the lioncomes, do your part ; else you shall repent. You bea bull, come forth and fight ;for this isyour fittingfunction. You, again, can lead an army to Troy ; sobe Agamemnon. You can meet Hector in singlecombat; be you Achilles!" 288. f O 0071,09 ouro9jiiairo X.19 e. K. rjovala ef 179 Se&rjfjiiovpyrjTai, /ua, K.dvdyicr) Trepiobov TWO, elvau K.Trapa^cioprja-ivaX\.a)VaXXot? : where we may note Aurelius favourite apology ;the consubstantiality of the world, the fleetingness ofthe part, the rearrangement of constituents scatteredby the dissolution of an organism, the need of this tokeep the whole bright and new by perpetual change.So 371 :avraf /j,a0ci)v QTI TO yevofjuevov K. <f>6aprivai Bel,r(va o KoVjAos fjirj lo-TTjrai, /ur)?? e/LtTToStfj/ra*, corresponding exactlyto that meditation on the transience ofphysical objects, brief compounds soon resolved, whichcomprises the whole of Aurelius speculative knowledge;and is all the lesson the Universe has to teach him.

""aVTHE NEW CYNISM 93(C) PROVIDENCE EXTENDING TO PARTICULARS ;DISCIPLINE OF THE SONS OF GODANALYSIS5. Natural Law becomes God s will; God interested even inpersons (Socrates).6. The Good must be happy, like Hercules, the Son of God, in allthe toils which the taskmaster imposes.5. There is in such a Universal Law (.. . compounded of a father s tender solicitude, a harsh taskmaster s arbitrary apportionment to slaves . . .)acontinual change of standpoint from Pietism to callousindifference, which latter is the proper attitude of Cynicand Stoic. I cannot understand the Universe, nor onwhat ground I call it a moral sphere, or ruled by Providence ;but I am not going to let other and meanermen see that I am puzzled." Scientific law is transformedinto Heaven s will, unconscious and blind into consciouspersonal purposive 7. Use all the indifferent ex:ternals, ft)? 7T(f)VK6v"UW9 OVV 7Te(f)VKVft>96 0609#6X77. 45. Epictetus goes far to meet the populardemand for a special providence, a daemonic tutelar,such as Appuleius, for instance, discovers in Isis, theEoman Catholic in a patron saint : He dismissesEpicurean compromise (elcrl //,ez>, fjLrjSevos eirifieXov-. . . Trcw? 7^9 eo-Tcu ;he will not be content/jievoi)even with the current Stoic belief that God looks togeneral laws, but abandons the particular to itself (ovrcovfc.eTri/jbeXovfjLevwv el fjuffiefila Stao<79 et9 av0p. e. efavr&vKAI NH AIA TE KAI EIS *EME), howcan this again be salutarydoctrine 1 We havereached the Socratic conviction that he personallyand his doings were interesting to the gods. This

""""94 MARCUS AURELIUSis religion, and this alone ! It is this sense which islost in the materialism of Aurelius system, and retainedanomalously in the candour of Aurelius piety. Seeingthis, the good man rrjv avrov yvw/jirjv uiroTCTaxeyTO>SIOIKOVVTI, TO, f/ O\a cocrTrep ol dyaOol iroXirai ra> yofxw TTJSn-oXews. The analogy here, again, breaks down ;humansociety is after all a voluntary association what; escapeor asylumis there for the disillusioned citizen of theworld ? So, again, on life s trials he uses another simile,which, like all Stoic comparisons, is only half true !God issending you labours, chastening every sonwhom He receiveth and;Hercules is a type of suchtoils cheerfully borne: 74: A I Trepcardo-e^Sei/cvvoucrai, \OITTOV oravw<?eiirrTjs rpa^e veavar/cq)cm o eo? <ree. alVery good but for what;ulterior motive ?not surely for the advance to infinity,"which is nothat your stout fight may beargument or justification ;an example to another, and he again may pass on thetorch of this purposeless fortitude ?For the end is wa OXUJATUOVIKYIS 76^77* St^a S Iov yiyveTai. So 272 : ov TreTreio-Tai 8 o TI avTOVTCOV, OTL E/ce2vo$ CLVTOVHpa/c\f)<;V7r yEvpvaOewsiravra ouro? 8 VTTO rov Aws dOXou fjie^os. . .K. dyavaKTeiv. So 304. God sendsK6Kpa<yevai,his saints to Gyara and to prison ov picr&v ^;ryevoiro Tt? Be fjaael rov apiarrov TWV VTnypercovTWVavrov ;ov& d^eK^v os y"^ v fM/cpoTdrcd\\d yvfjivd^wvlK.pdprvpi Trpbs TOVS]In a similar strain Seneca, De Provid. 2 :Omnia adversa exercitationesputat.. . . Athletas videmus . . . cum fortissimis confligere,etc. Marcet sine adversario Virtus. . . Patrium habet Deus adversus

"THE NEW CYNISM 95Els TOiavTrjv uirrjpccriaj0X09 7T/309TOV Oeov TGTafjLcii, ; This is, of course,emotional and pietistic, but quite inadmissible ;in amonistic universe this spectacle of struggle andendeavour, where there is no triumph to achieve, ismerely the sanguinary gladiatorial exhibition whichgratifies the vanity of a "despicable tyrant Morituri;Caesar te salutant." So 312: Tpv(f>dv ^teov 6e\eiovSe yapTO>cHpaK\el irapefyev utct eavrov,ru> TO>... o 8* eTrerdao ero K. eirovei K.a7Tttcr?79 7779 K. 0aXaTT?;9 ap^wv K.,aSt/aa9 K. dvofjula? K. ravr GiroUl K. YU^OS K.. . .6.Surely the good must be happy; 290: TV?Be Ka\6s re K. dyaObs Svarv^el ; Tc3 OVTI /ca/eo)? bioiraff O\a, el jmrj eV^eXetTatriv wcriv 6/jiOLoiavTa>6 Zevs TWV caurou6vBal/jLov6<;.In 352 thesum of practical happinessis (as always in Epictetus)gathered up into a brief formula ; here, curiously, thescientific and the religious aspects of the world areintermingled and confused. M ia 0805 eVl evpoiavbonos Viros animum, et illos fortiter amat, et operibus inquitdoloribus ac damnis exagitentur, ut verum colligant robur ! . . .Miraris tu si Deus ille bonorum amantissimus, etc. . . . Non fuit DiisImm. satis spectare Catonem semel ;retenta ac revocata Virtus est utin difficiliori parte se ostenderet(where the comparison of such a deityto a sanguinary spectator of the arena is fully justified). 4: "Hositaque Deus quos probat quos amat, indurat, recognoscit, exercet . . .in castris quoque periculosa fortissimis imperantur Dux lectissimos. . .mittit . . . Nemo . . . dicit male de me imperator metuit, sed bene.judicavit. .digni visi sumus Deo in quibus experiretur quantumhumana natura posset pati." (The misleading and fallacious characterof this simile has been already pointed out.) ..." Quid mirum si duregenerosos spiritus Deus tentat ? nunquam virtutis molle documentumest."(Perhaps this language of pious resignation scarcely concealsthe latent defiance; 6: "Hoc est quo Deum antecedatis : Ille extrapatientiam malorum est, vos supra. )

e<j>"96 MARCUS AURELIUSiToo-Taa is TWV7rpoaipeT(ov, TOai, TO irapaSovvai Tcavra T>Saifjuoviw,e/ceivovs eircTpoTrovs avTwv TroiijaaaOat ovs K. o Zevs(viz/ the undeserving rich and powerful),rpos evl elvai /j,6vq>rc3ISiqyTCOTV)afCca>\vTa).Here againit ispurely religious in tone ;345 :ryap elfJbi K. TOV<J>i\6s Oeov, iv KWK ireiOwfJiat328. "I have never been prevented willing,nor unwilling forced ;how is this 1IJLOV Tqv opiirjvTO) @eo). e\ei JJLe/ceivosKdyw 0A.w . . . airodavelv ovv Oeovv 0e\a). In 385, comforting death, Epictetusaddresses a personal Deity quite after the Christianfashion:l-4? e\aftov afyopfjuas Trpos TO alaOecrQaiaov Tt}? Sioifcrjaea)? K. dKo\ov0fjcrai, avTrf, TOVTCOV ovrcrjpe\r)(ra ov KaTycr^yvaere pr) TTOTC ere. . .SvarjpeaT rjcra. . . OTL fie crv eyevwrjcras xapiv&v e&coicasocrov e^ptjo-dfjLrjv rot? crot?, dp/eelHd\LV avTa diro\aj3e K.KaTcura^ov els rjv 0e\ei,sSa yap $]V iravra,) av poi avra Seotofcas . . . rt? tovKpeiTTwv ;KaTacrTpocfrrj evoai/jboveaTepa ;. . . Troia370 : del fjbd\\ov eicelvo OeXw TO ywofjievov. KpeiTTOvyap rjyovfjiai, o 6 @eb<$ Be\ei rj o eyw. npOGKeloro/jLai,K. d/coXovOos erceivq), avvopfia) avvopeyofiai,

"OutCHAPTER IIof the night which covers me,Black as the pit from pole to pole,I thank whatever gods there beFor my unconquerable soul."THEWISE MAN IN THE TWO COMMONWEALTHS;OPPORTUNISM, OR THE RdLE OF CONTEMPLATION AND PASSIVITY(A) MODERN CONCEPTION OF STOICISM IN ERROR:THE ESSENTIAL EXPEDIENCY OF RESIGNATION ANDABSTENTIONANALYSIS1. Erroneous view of ancient Stoicism (Arnold, Renan) ;anabsolute contrast to the modern temper.2. Pure selfishness and personal expediency the recognised aim ;sole duty of reflexion, to convince us that inward peace, theonly good, is under our control, is ours for the asking.BEFORE the Unknown, one nature, like Ajax, is superblydefiant ;another in doglike resignation creeps back tothe hand that smote it, with humbled and fawningdeprecation, not, however, wholly contemptible another;boldly forces the invisible power out of dull naturallaw into personality, and compelsit to hold intercoursewith its poor creature across the void. Nothing is7

"how"""98 MARCUS AURELIUSmore astonishing than to notice the universal approbation of the enlightened nineteenth century for thesetwo latter characters. Surely it has absolutely forgotten its starting-point, itsveryraisond etre."The essence of the modern spirit is to expel thedepressing abomination which hands men over totyranny in the politic, to stagnation in the social,to superstition in the religious ;whatever is, is right."Fetich-worship of the natural order is entirely unreasonable. Nature is not God s will at all, but mainly ourown creation ;a useful quarry for our comforts anddiscoveries ; stronger than poor humanity, it is true,but to be evaded, cajoled, deceived, forced, anythingbut worshipped as divine. It is difficult to understandhow Matthew Arnold could have written the following1words : "It is remarkable," he writes of Aurelius,little of a merely local or temporary character,how little of those scorice which a reader has to clearaway before he gets to the precious ore, how little thateven admits of doubt and question, the morality ofMarcus exhibits." In general, the action Marcusprescribes is action which every sound nature mustrecognise as right, and the motives he assigns aremotives which every clear reason must recognise asvalid." We might be back in the eighteenth century,the Age of Eeason, in this complacent appeal toteleology of Nature and our rational faculty. Thewhole presupposition on which Epictetus and Marcusethic depends is that we have no control over things1Even if we remember how far we are separated in thought from hisstandpoint, how the process of never-ending analysis has placed moralideas in the same category as theological, showing that either theydepend mutually on each other, or that both are equally insecure.

"""SELFISHNESS 99or circumstances, and must bow to destiny. SinceBacon s time, we have utterly rejected this belief ;andall schemes of improvement, secular and religious alike,rest in large measure upon our confident transformationof our surroundings. As to that reverential kissingof the rod,"there is no place any longer for such atheory. As to the primacy of this inner spark, thereor itsis no such Manichean belief in itsindependenceauthority. As to the Supreme Centre of Life in theuniverse, if it is found merely active in the materialrealm, it is not much concern of ours, and we will driveit as we have driven gnomes and fairies from theirrustic domains : Great Pan is dead." If traces of itsfootstepsare rather to be discovered in the historic andsocial life of humanity, still more clearly perchance inindividual life, in the instinctive hope of the race foranother life, a\\r)$ av e lrj Gictyews for here the Stoics;with their intense self-consciousness and intense scornof personality cannot help us : we cannot meet on equalterms ;and there is no common starting-point for ourdiscussion.Equally fallacious, or rather self-deceptive, is Eenan seulogy, which would apply with equal exactness eitherto Epictetus or to his pupil Marcus : La religion deMarc Aurele est la religion absolue, celle qui resulte dusimple fait d une haute conscience morale, placee en facede 1 univers. Elle n est d aucune race ni d aucun pays.Aucune revolution, aucun changement, aucune d^couverte,ne pourront la changer."And we have thisinconsiderate and meaningless praise from one who is ahigh priest of the Scientific Spirit. Since he cannotdetect that the whole hypothesis of life has changedafter the liberation of the citizen and the discoveries of

""iooMARCUS AURELIUSmodern thought,it is waste time to enlarge on his totalmisconception. Stoicism is just the one phase of semiscientific,semi-mystical thought which can never recur.We have severed finally and completely the two realmsof human life and activity. The Moral Consciousness,confronted with the problem of the Universe, willeither, with Kant, proceed through the curious foreignnessof the moral instinct to the three corollaries, whichStoics deny ; or, despairing of correspondence in an alienworld with its inward aspirations (not, indeed, a demandfor pleasure, but for mere justice), it will range itselfwith the complacent and scholarly pessimism ofSchopenhauer, or with the openor Gorki.revolt of Nietzsche2. Indeed, these rhetorical eulogists seem to havepenetrated but little into the inner core of this practicalStoicism. Resignation was pure expediency ;andEpictetus at least shows that here is supreme justification for his maxim ;that along this path of least resistance lay the road, the only road, to happiness andpeace. He never for a moment elevates an altruisticstandard ;never speaks in vague and lofty language ofthe calls of duty, apart from personal interest. It wasthe mere determination to be unassailable, to offer noweak spot in the fort, no hostage to fortune. A consistent and unperturbedlife could be secured by mastering a few rules, by making up one s mind that thecontrol of things and events and persons could never beours.If weanticipate(as it were) l the disappoint-1For all particular morality, behaviour in detail, is the recognition ofthe minor premise:tyap/Aoyr) TUV TrpoXrj^ewv rats tirl fttpovs otifflais,testing power of the will applying the touchstone of preconceived ruleswhich could assuredly never be derived from individual experience.

"SELFISHNESS 101ments or the shocks of lifeby this firm assurance, weshall not be shaken from our moorings into the ragingsea of passion and suspense and fear ;nor does theconstant appeal to the divine will or to God s specialcare for His children blind one to the fact that Hegives us already all He can, an unconquerable soul."We expect no more from Him, in special grace, norecognition, no recompense (which to the Christian isa prerequisite of rational morality, not as a vulgarreward in kind, but the eternal sense of God sapproval,the true heaven).How frank is the following confession, a rule offaith and of life ! Beneficence isonly incidental toself-culture. 65. Freedom before tyrants (a favouritesubject) TOVTO OVK e(7Ti <f>i\avTov ryeyove yap OVTMS TOffq)OVaurou KKa irarra iroiei. Kal yapH\io<$ avr.V. TT. Trotet, K. TO \oi7Tov auT09 o Zevs. aXX orav 6e\yre 6ea)i>elvat, TeVto? K. EiriKdpTrios K. HaTrjp avbpwvre, opas that he cannot attain such functions or suchtitles, av //.??et9 TO KQIVOV w^eXt/^o? 77. Such, then, Hemade the nature of rational beings iva prjSevos TWV:l&iwv ayaOwv SvvrjTai, Tvy^dvecv eav /nrjTiot)(f)e\LfjLOV 7rpoo~(f)epr)TaL OVTCOS OUKCTI dKoiKw^Tet9 TO KQIVOVTO irci^d aurou eVeKa TTOIGIV. Eirel TLeK^e^T] / WO,avTov K. TOV l$ia)<$(Tv/ji^epovTO^ ; Kal 7TW9 Gr>\>\ it \ (K. rj aim) ap^rjiraaiv e. rj Tcpos \Here the only way to serve the public is to develop,realise one s own specific nature.Unselfishness Epictetusneither demands nor expects. He is far more in agreement with modern thought when he recognises that theultimate impulse is self-preservation, instinct of survivalat all costs, than when he ispreaching abstention andacquiescence. That this rudimentary impulse of life takes

"&>102 MARCUS AURELIUSa somewhat different trend in man, and seems to overleap the span of mortal existence with a sense of widerexpediency, does not in the least alter its original andhistoric character Individualism. In 17 he condemnsscientific research (eirl Trjv ev Tofc /3i/3\ioi<$ efyv TeraaOai)because it in no way assists this inner life he bids him;straightway go home K. p,rj d^Le\etv TWV efcel TOVTO japefi o a7ro$e$rj/Jir]Kev ovo ev e. dXX, e/ceivo jxeXera^ e^eXeiy rovfttov TreV0T] K. oipoyds fc. TO ol fioi K. TO TaX9 eyct).49.The XprjcrLs (fravTao-iwv alone in your control ;ri ovveTricrTras aeavrqi ravO wv avvirevOvvos el; rovr earivcaurw irapexen irpdyfjiaTa. 71 :70) <yap 7re<pvica, TTpb? TO: Aia TI $t,a 8vo-rv^e2<iTi6e\ovTosJJLOJ/ aujji<j)epov . 161(7ov TI ov ryiveTai, K. /AT] 6e\ovTos <y[v6Tai ; aTroSetft? japavrrj pejicrT?) Sucrpoias K. KaKoSaijjLOKias. 145. The epyovTOV (piXoaotyovvTos is this ;OTL Set TTJV avrov /3ov\7i<ri,vTot? jivofjLevoisa>9fJitJTe TL . . . aic6vTu>vjivea-flai*, KT\. El; ov irepiean.. 158.:. .fjbrjCLTTO-/JLrj jrepnriTrTeiv, dXuirws d<j>6|3ws aTapax^sf/29 aTTTjXXaYJAeVos SouXeias TO\[jt,rj<70Vava-7T/309 TOV Oebv, eljrelv OTL Xpw pot,\oi7rov et9o av $eA?79 O~OL }cro9 el/jLL 335 :AvTrj r)o{jLO<yva>fJLOva)0809 eV eXeuOeptaM dyei, avTrj fjiovr] diraXXaYY] SouXeias, TOSwrjOfjvai TTOT elirelv ef 0X7/9 ^rv^rj<^TOajov 8e fju Zev, KT\.291. The Oeo/md-^o^ who fights against Heaven s decrees,like the tragic sufferers, isalways anxious and miserable,7T/309 Tracrav d7ra<yye\iav Tpefjicov, e f eVicrToXcoz/ dXXorpiW(Seneca s emphatic aliena opinio03") rjpTrjfAeinrjv ^X ^ T^ vdirdOeiai/. ... To the fool who will not be freeefjiavTovhe says in contempt : KdOrjao TOIVVV 77/509 irdvTa Tavraeirro^fAeVos irefOwK aTux^K SUO-TUXWJ ef aXXof rjpTrj^evo^.305, 306: Ov yap vTrep TrdXrjs K. TraytcpaTi ov 6 djcbv

*A<j>esovv"""Ka\alSELFISHNESS 103TrpoKelraidX\ . . . vrrep avTTjs euruxtas K.320. This personal assurance, inward calm, peace, subjective happiness is what all men seek rl yap : e. o forelTTa? dvOpcOTTOS; uora0T]<7CU, euScujjiovfjcrcu, TTavB to? 6e\lTToieiv, urj Kco\vecrdaL l 362 : Ov #e\et9 TOUS dXXousd<|>lsauros aauTw yevecrOat, K. uaQrjTrjs K. 8i$a<rKd\os; 352 :ravra irdvTa.at *A6rjvai"*A\\a TOj/ Ka\\iov TTO\V TO diTa0Y] elvai TO drdpaxoi TO eVlKeicrOat, TO, era rrpajfJiaTa.368 : Ti /co)\vi, tfivKou<f>a>sK. CUTII/IWS rrdvTa TCL avfji^aiveiv Swdfjieva rrpdw^e/cSe^o/mevov ; 378. The foolish man says,6e\w TI K.ov ryiveTai, eya) druxTj? dpi. The proficient who is vainand proud of his advance says, drraOijs elpi K.aTapa^o^prj dyvoeiTe w dv9., OTL vpwv KVKwpevcov K. Oopvftov-Trepl Ta fjbrjftevos di,a, fjt,ovo<$ Ijco dir^XXayjAai TrdarjsThough Epictetus repudiates this as vulgardisplay, Kevov K. <popTiKov, yetit is obvious that he issecretly in full sympathy with the maxim of Lucretius,Suave mari .magno. . alterius spectare laborem, ii. 1.So happiness, a purely personal matber, is (as to Marcus)completely under one s control. 383 :OeXr^crat Set K.yeyovev, Sia)pOcoTai, . . . "EawOey yapecrrt K. dirwXeia K.It follows naturally from this emphasison the innertemper (91 TOVTOV TOV vouov o 0eo9 TeOeitce K. fao-lv:el Ti dyaOov QeXeis, rrapa o-cauToG \d/3e that other")men interest the introspective philosopher but little.158: OVK elHpa/c\rj<;K. ov $vvr) Ka0aipew rdXXorpiaSeneca, Tranq. Animi :Quid desideras autem magnum et summum1est Deoque vicinum, non concuti. Hanc stabilem animi sedem Gr^eciev6v/j,iai> vocant, de qua Democriti egregium volumen est ; ego Iranquillitatemvoco." Compare Diog. Laert. ix. 45 : Etdvplav . . . >ca0ty ya\f}vws K. io-Ta0ws ^ ^vxy Sidyei virt>deio-iSaifji.ovia.3 T)&\\ov TWOS TrdOovs.

104 MARCUS AURELIUSKa/ca aXX* ovBe iva raij<Tv<? 7*79 *ATTt,/cfjsTO arauToG He controls theK<i0apoi>. eager and meddlesome philanthropist whose zeal outruns knowledge anddiscretion; 245 : Evdews 009 cro^ol Stdyetv e6e\ofj,ev tc.u^>e\iv d^Opwiroug. Uoiav<*)(f)e\6iav ;ri Troieis ; aavrovyap a)(f>e\rjaa<; ; *A\\d irporpe^ai avrovs 0eXet9. Svyap Trporerpe^frai ;. . .Sel^ov aviols em (reaurou oious<|>iXo<ro<|)ia,K. fj^rj <p\vdpei, ! ecrOicov, TTLVWV, ei/ccovave^ofJLevo^ )o#T6>9 avrovs axpeXei K. JJLT) Kare^epauvrcov TO aavrov<j)\e<yfj,a!(B) CLOSE EESTRICTION OF THE SPHERE OF MISSIONARYINFLUENCE; KEJECTION OF Civic OR DOMESTICDUTIES BY THE TRUE ANCHORITESbut itANALYSIS3. The Cynic an exemplar rather than active consoler of men.4. Gnostic and Manichean scorn of human ties.3. True, he sometimes refers to his religious mission,is as a passive example, almost a lay figure, ratherthan as active teacher and consoler; 266: ElSevai BelOTL ayyeXos CLTTO rov A LOS direaTaXrai . . .Trepl dK. KCIKWV, viroSel^cov avrois OTI 7re7r\dvr]vrai K. dfyrovai rrjv ovaiav of these two. Or he is a spy orscout sent forward into the land of promise to reconnoitre, with clearer vision than the rest, to tell wheretrue happiness may be found yap own Kajdo-Koiros: Ta>e. o Kwitcb? rov TLVO, e. rot9 dvOp. <pi\dK. Tiva 7ro\/jiia,This mission is quite incompatible with ordinary ties ofhome-life. 273 :ATreplcnrao-rov elvai, Set roz^ K.VVIKOV0\OV 7T/309 TV) StaKOkia TOV @OV, 7Tl,<j)Ol,TaV av6p<i>TTOi<$ov7rpo<r$6$e/jLevov

"How"DETACHMENT 105ouS e/j,7r7r\ey/jLevov a?o"%ea-eo i,v, irapa^aivwv /JLGVozWrt <rco(T(, TO rov KaKov tcayaOov Trpo&wTrov, TtjpcovBe a7ro\el rov ayye\ovtc. KdTacrKOTrov K. rcr/pv/caTWJ> Oewv ;Then follows a curious passage in depreciation of homecares and duties 274 and in contempt for any otherfinal standard of life but that of detached serenity.universal mission is spoilt by being restricted to parHisticular ties. Great pains have been bestowed (andsometimes wasted) upon demonstrating the doctrinaldebt of the Christian Church to Greek philosophy;butit is not difficult to see whence came the practicalascetic ideal of anchorite and monk, hermit and ascetic ;for Epictetus is nearer Simon Stylites than to a preaching friar in a more robust and social age. 273. A youngman asks him if he would accept a friend s invitation tocome to his house and be tended in sickness (wo-re vocro-K.ofjLr}6rjvai)he; replies: riou Se<f>iXoV JJLOL Sewcret? KimicoG ;347 : AOITTOV Trpoae^co rot? dv0p. rlva fyaal TTOOSKivovvTai, K. Tovra ov KaKorjQax; ovft Lv 6%a) tyeyeiv rjdXX* eir e jxauToc eiriorTpecjxu, el ravra Kayo*. . . Tore KOL eyco r^fiapravov vvv Stov/ceri^dpis raj It would be very unfair to assimilate@ea>.the Cynic to the Pharisee in the temple but such selfcentredcomplacence is more akin to that type or to the;yLte^aXoi/ry^o? of Aristotle than to any modern ideal ofethical behaviour. He clearly, with his sympathy forDiogenes, goes too far in attributing this passive tolerance to Socrates, who owed his influence to a real, notto an assumed or pretentious, interest in others. 354.imperturbable he was under provocation! \iavyap ar0aXw9 efJLe^vrjTo on, ovBels d\\orpiov fjye/jLOvitcovKvpievei ovSev ovv a\\o ij0e\v rjTO ISiov (desired thatonly which was in his power), not to change them

106 MARCUS AURELIUSTOVTO yap d\\orpiov, butthat while they acted according to their nature, he might also keep to his (OTTCO?ra iSia TTOLOVVTWV cw? avrois So/eel, avrbs /JLrj&ev1Kara fyvvw e%ei. For 361 : Eicelva /AOVOV aouSeSorat, o-auroi/ irciom. He is glad, however, to be ablein the more social days of the Koman Empireto havethe figure of Socrates to set up for men s imitation.He is quite aware of the general impression which isleft by Cynical preaching. Kal f iva ^rj So 779, 339 :OTL TrapaSeLj/jia ^eiKWjJLi, dv8po$ airepiaraTov JJ,Y]T yuyaiicTeWa jiYJTC TTctTpiSa ^7 <fuXous rj crvyyevels, v<pwvK. TrepicnracrQai rj&vvaro, XaySe ScofcpaTij K.7. K. Tra&ia e^o^ra, a\\ a>?a\\6rpi,a He ismuch annoyed when on his discountenancing matrimony,the interlocutor inquires: JTw? ovv ert Smcrwcret rrjvKoivcovlav; rov Oeov crot !fjiel^ova 8* evepyerovaiv av-QptoTrovs ol rj$vo rj rpla Kaic6ppvy%aTralBia di>0 avrwveladyovres, rjol etricr/coTrovvTes Trdvras Kara Svva/jiLVdvOp. rl TTOIOVCTW, TTW? Sidyovaiv, rtVo? . . . dfi6\ovcriTrapa TO all this isTrpo<rr)Kov ; very true in a way, butsuch scornful language of pride and isolation seems topartake of that vulgar complacence (KGVOV K. fyopriKov)which he rightly repudiated above.4. It is quite easy to induce in some minds a kind ofascetic morality by dwelling on the squalid side of naturalprocesses, by pitying Hooker very much when he is foundrocking the cradle, by exciting and stimulating a disgust(ready enough to hand in most minds) at the mysteriousunion of the noblest and the most ignoble in human love.Marcus will be found even more emphatic he; analysesphysical passion until nothing remains but the sordid1So to the tyrant, there is no animosity, no reproof ;You must cutoffmy head 1 Very well, you do your part ;I will do mine."

"DETACHMENT 107and contemptible.While many may perhaps secretlysympathize with this, no one can help feeling disappointment when Epictetus dismisses the holiestrelationship of parent and child with a realistic epithet.In a word, the moral system of Epictetus and Aureliusis a revived Cynism which, however, it may compromiseand modify and make concessions to common sense andordinary decorum, is at root profoundly anti-socialand subjectivist. It substitutes for Socrates as thetypical man a figure of Diogenes seen through a haloof saintship which he was far from deserving ;and it isnot without interest to notice that the Emperor Julianhas the same extravagant admiration for the leastestimable of Hellenic moralists.(C) THE SAGE SPECTATOR RATHER THAN AGENT INTHE UNIVERSEANALYSIS5. Man, like the gentry at a fair or race-meeting, comes into thisworld merely to look on.5. The philosopher, foiled or impotent in his attemptsat reform, holding a cynical isolation to be the highesthas interwoven with these coarser threads the morelife,refined curiosity and respect for Nature.Citizen of thelarger commonwealth, he surveys the Universe as spectator, in that attitude of semi-mystic contemplation andworship which effectually prevents a utilitarian attitudeto things, or a sincere interest in the human community.Epictetus rightly insists on the difference of function,"though his teleology is childish, and harmonises ill withthe Stoical impersonality of the creative energy (22, 23).

TJ/JLOVVi o8MARCUS AURELIUSThe distinction of men and animals is just this reflection,which puts an end once for all to our paradisaic innocence and enjoyment:the TrapaKoXovOrjTifcr)2 2. God has need of animals and of men ;xpco/Aevcov Tafr <$>avTao-lai<$, rj^wv Se 7rapa/co\ov~. . .OovvTw rfj xprjcrei- l/ceivois ^ev dptcel TO ecrOieiv KT\.riyJlv 8e . . . ov/ceri, TCLVT dirapKel, aXX* av pr) KaraTpoTrov K. TeTayjuLeva)*; K. d/co\ovQa)<$ TTJ e/cda-rov<j)vo-eiK. KaracTKevfj irpaTTW^ev ovxeri TOV TeXof? rev^ofJieOaTOV eavrwv. One to be eaten, another to help intillage, another to give cheese, such their duties. TOV3 avOpwTrov OeaTTjv elo-tfyayev AVTOV re K. TWV epycov. . . K. ov fiovov 6ea,Tr)V a\\a K. ^r\yr\T^]v CLVTWV. AiaTOVT e. TO>ala"xpov dv$p. ap^eaOau K. tca,Ta\rj f yeiv OTTOVK. Ta a\07a, aXXa JJLO\\OV evOev\r)<yeivSe^>*o KaT6\ij^6V !</>rj3* 67rl Qewpiav K. 7rapaKO\ovdrj(nv K. (TV/JL^COVOVTT) (frvcrei. OpaTe ovv, firjdSearot TOVTWV dirThe animals have instinct and impulse, and do theirallotted task without reflecting on their mission. Mandoes so reflect. His "differentia" (e fat/?eroz>, 210) isnot bare XP^^ fyavTaaiwv, but Xoyuo) xprjcns.Andwhen Eeason thus awakes to guide and hallow Instinct,what results ?Nothing except the gradual abatementof Instinct, as in Buddha s system,the will-to-live isbecalmed and neutralized. Man no more ads ;he onlycontemplates. And this is his highest pleasure ; andtherefore his highest duty. For in the Stoic scheme(hedonist in all but name) there is no real distinctionbetween wise pleasure and the aim of our being.148, 9 : ToiavT e. TCL fjfjLeTepa&>9 evTrai/rjyupei flocksto be sold, and men, some to sell, some to buy ; 0X170^Se Tives e. ol KaTa Qeuv epo^evoi 7^)9

DETACHMENT 1097ra>9 rovro yiverai K. Sia ri K. rives ol riOevres rrjvK. eVt rlvi. So in this iravr)<yvpivgreat world-fair :some like beasts think of nought but food for sub;stance, slaves, fields, office, all are but food in differentforms ; o\vyoi $ e. ol Travrjyvpi&vres avd.Tt9 iror ovv e. 6 Koafjios, rt? avrov Bioifcel . . .Tt9 K. 7TW9 . . .Ser)fjiels rives ovres VTT avrov <yeyova/j,evK. TTpbs ri epyov ; apa y e^ofjiev rtva eVtTAvrov K. . . .a^effiv rj ovBefjiiav. Tovrcp. . .^ov(Ti TOO rrjv Travfyvpiv IcrroprjO dvTas aTr/cara>ye\wvTai,VTTO rwv Tr6\\(0v.This is, of course, a new form of the familiar storyof Pythagoras and the tyrant of the Phliasians, toldin the pseudo-Pythagorean texts, and by Cicero. Theonly proper business of the elect is to reflect on theorigin and use of being, come (no doubt) to a negativeconclusion, and resign as soon as may be the burdenof life.It must be remembered that wisdom in those daysprofessed to guide men in life ;not merely, like ourMystics to-day, to display the sterile unity of existence,which allows no room for qualification. These neverpretend to control things, exhort men, or elevateideals ; only to understand the given, and sum up inset formulae. Other influences govern men to-day ;butin the Imperial age, philosophy seriously claimed toregulate No life. one can regret that this esotericreligion did not penetrate far into the heart of thepeople. Men still believed that there was somethingworth living and fighting for ;and the Gospel reinforcedthe old instinctive belief of mankind, that simple actsare better than indolence, zeal (even though mistaken)than indifference.

"""CHAPTER IIITHE ULTIMATE PROBLEMS(A) DEATH AND IMMORTALITYANALYSIS1. Life, as profoundly moral and significant; death,physical dissolution; a release not to friendly godsas merebut tofrigid elements ; man, not a fellow -worker with God in anyreal sense, but a captive forced into the arena to make sport.2. Ambiguous phrases, "return to God"; Buddhism; resignation^a virtue of necessity.3. Man really excluded from both worlds, animal and divine;the soleexpediency (in face of the unknown) is the end,motive ;Virtue recognised neither in this world nor thenext ;Death welcome as the haven of all ivoes.1. SUCH unscientific Science is closely akin to neurotic mysticism and it is for this reason that both;Epictetus and Aurelius regard with so little perturbationthe THANATISTIC hypothesis.The ultimate problem of death, as end of materialand spiritual life, dissolution of body and extinction ofcharacter, is treated, as in Aurelius, in a physical andun-moral light. Life, so profoundly moral and devotional !death, so purely a matter of physical science,of the scalpel, the dissecting-room! It is curious toturn from the absorbed pietism and self-abandonment ofhis prayers to Zeus,Thy will, not mine, be done," to

""THE ULTIMATE PROBLEMSinhis chilling pedantry in the explanations of death.104 : OdvarosTL eo~Ti ; /AopfAoXviceiov o~Tpe^fra$avroKardpaBe IBov TTW? ov Bdicvei, ! (alittle reminiscenceof Theocritus). To o-utpaTiov Bel %a)pi,o-()fjvai,TOV Trvevfjuarlovco? rrrpoTepov e/ce^copiaro, r) vvv r) vo~Tpov. Ti ovvdyavaKTel? el vvv ;. . . iva r) irepioBos avvyrat, TOVKOCT/JLOV xpeiav yap e^et TWV fiev ivifTTa^kv^v TWVBe fjbeX\,6vTa)v rwv 8 TJVVO-fjievwv \ So this child ofGod, this spectator and appraiser of the divine works,is, after all, in no way superior to an animal. Let ushear what Epicurus says after this discovery that thegods take no thought of men, and that at death thesoul is extinguished. 179: Ti ovv; ov/c dpea-iceicrotravra; \d/3e vvv, TTCO? TJ StKaiocrvwrj ovbev earl TTCO? Y)at 8ft>9jjicopla e. vrcS? TrarrjpovBev e. TTCO? o vios ovBev e.He will not practise this destructive theory ;but logically it is complete and irrefutable. Epictetus thin veilof pietism cannot abolish the fundamental inconsistencyof the religious and the scientific view of the world.244. The contrast, though painful,is almost comical :"Orav Be /JLTJ Trape^rj rdva^Kaia, TO dvaK\7}TiKov aTjfjLaivei,rrjv Ovpdv rjvoi^ev K. \eyei aoi So far so "Ep-ftov. good ;the personal and loving relation so conspicuous in theCynic s life is not, then, to be cut short at death ?JToO; et? ovBev Beivov aXX oOev eyevov, et? rd<f>i\dK.avyyevfj of course, to the gods? et? ra aroL^ela\r/We are amazed is this all he has to tell;us ? Oaov fyev aoi Trvpos et9 Trvp dTretaiv, oaov rjv yrjBiov et? yrjBiov,KT\. OvBels "ABrjsovB* A^epcov ovBe K.COKVTOS ovBeHvpifyXeryeOtov d\\d irdvra Oewv fieard K. Bai/j,6vcov. . . .What if someone should come and slay me ?Mcope,0-6 ov d\\d TO crcofidTLov. Here the dualism is acknowledged, and the invulnerability of the true Ego almost

"H2MARCUS AURELIUSdogmatised. Like Acis,To kindred gods his soulreturns." The thought, however, is not further pursued in this passage, but seems taken up somewhatlater. 266 : To crco/judriov 8 ovBev TT/JO? e/jierd TOVTOV/^eprjovftev TT/OO? e//,e. Gdvaros ; ep^ecrOco orav 0e\r)eW 6\ov eire fjuepov? Tti/09. $vyrj ; K. TTOV SvvaTai nso>eK/3a\eiv ef TOU Kocr/iou ;OTTOV & av a7re\0o) e/cei fj\to?<T6\r)vr) eicel dcrrpa evvirvia olwvol f] TT/OO? 6eov?ia. It will be noted that he here passes rapidlyover death without an explanation ;it is therefore justpossible (but to me by no means probable) that heintends the assurance and comfort of the last sentenceto extend also to the disembodied spirit. He is onoccasion very outspoken and straightforwardon theof Law inunfeeling or unconscious cruelty or designdealing death ; unsuccessfully with this mechanicalautomatism he attempts to combine the idea of aCreator and of Providence. 300, 301 : Olov jape.%6l/JLQ)V 7Tp09 (TVKOV, TOIOVTOV 6. TTCLCTa f) ttTTO TWV"O\Ct)V7T6picrTa<ri,$ TT/DO? ra KCLT avTrjv avaipovfjueva . . . aTrco-\eiav yap (rrjfjuitvei TMV crra^vcDV) dXX ov TOV Koa/jiov.. . . HdvTdyap ravra TCOV Trporepcov elaw et? erepafc,OUK dircjXeia, dXXa TerayfAenrj Tt? oiKO^ojjitaK.-is. . . Odvaros, fjueraftoXr] ^lei^wv, <ou/e>u OuKTi ouve/c TOV vvvet? TO fjirjov aXX e^9 TO vvv fjirj ov.cro|jiat;"OUK ecrei. aXX* aXXo rt, ov vvv 6ore <rv<rvKoo~yLto9 xpetav e^et.Kal yap eyevov ov%r)0\r)<rasaXX ore 6 Kocrfio^ XP e ^av ^a X ^ && tnepicturesque metaphors of Sons of God, athletes tried atOlympia, soldiers to whom a wise general sounds therecall, 1 break down utterly, confronted with such a pass-1 He is particularly fond of this simile ; cf. 94 : Eai>(rrj^v-rj ry TOws r

""THE ULTIMATE PROBLEMS 113age The sole analogy is the wretched captive in the!Roman amphitheatre, who, forced into the arena, hasto slay his comrades for the spectators pleasure, andthen himself be slain. Even the gladiator takes voluntary risk ;he enters hisschoolore rjBek^cre, and notcompelled. This craven resignation to a Power whichin the end is not personal, shows the complete bankruptcy of logic or clear thought in this age, theprevalence of an emotionalism which can never unlocklife s secrets. 369. TL 0e\ew aTcoOavetv ; (on theimaginary tyrant and his power over men, a favouritetheme with the poor slave, whose idea of Caesar wasformed from Nero and Domitian). MTJ Tpaywoei, TOtlTrpay/jLaaXX elire a>?e^et ij^tj Kaipos TTJV vXijv e f &v(Tvvr)\6ev et9 eicelva ircikiv aTrotcaTao-Trjaai. Kal TLSewov ; TI /u-eXXet a7ro\\vo~6ai TWV ev TO>KocrfjiO) ;2. We must not be misled by the apparent sincerityof such passages as i. 9 (34) : o-v<yyevelsTWZS TOV Seovea/mev KafceWev $\r)\i>0afJLev ; acfces ^a? d-rreXOei^, a<j>es Xu0TJmi 7TOT6 T&V 8e(r|ji(UK TOUTWI/ TWVK. {BapovvTCDv (the true later Stoic dualism andready acceptance of Plato s antithesis of soul and body,in which the pure spirit is clogged and imprisoned).TOV Seov"AvOpcoTTOi,, efcSe^aaOe!"OTCLV e/cet^o? ari^vriK. a7ro\vo-7j TdVTris TTJ? vTrrjpecrias,TOT AIIEAET-HPO^ ATTON eirl & TOVIvoiicovvTesTavTrjv TTJV ^wpav els $]VeTa%ev. Aurelius has, as we shall see, the sameunfortunate ambiguity in his language ; I am myselfinclined, perhaps without sufficient data, and from anintuition hard to explain, to believe that Aurelius hada stronger personal hope than his master ;but I amconvinced that no modern Western mind is suited for

"""H4MARCUS AURELIUSthe task of such interpretation. It is congenial solelyto a Buddhist, in whose faith Nir-vana isby no meansuniversally defined as annihilation. Nay,is not Buddhism the most sympatheticand kindred system to thePorch ? For it is free from the hypothesis of God, whois not merely superfluous, but whose exemption from allcanons of ordinary morality or logic threatens the wholefabric of human duty and convention ! We cannot getany further ;we are compelled to leave the questionin unsatisfactory suspense. The convinced dualist ofthe Hegemonic (the true Inner Self and the miser")able envelope, when he comes to the supreme momentof the severance of Soul and Body, forgets the deitywithin," the divine dTroo-Tracr/jLa, and professes to becontent with a purely physical explanation of the returnof atoms or particles to their like. We have thereforeEpictetus, like a vessel unballasted, rolling in a tremendous arc between two irreconcilable dogmas, each ofwhich he believes so long as he is uttering it.dare you, insignificant part of the vast universe, complain What ?matter to the sum of things which knowsnot decay,ifyour leg be broken "? Sfce\os ovv H.QIyeveaOai, ireTryptopevov ; AvSpdiroSov (a favourite methodHowof address) elra Si ev o-/ce\vBpi,ov TW Koarfia) eyicaXeis ;OVK 67rtSw<ret5 avrb rofc "0\ois ; ov ^aipwv Trapa^wprjaeisTO) SeBcoKOTL ; dyavaKTtfcreis Se . . . rot? VTTO TOV A LOSBiaTeTayfjievois (a etceivos fjiera TWV Moipwv TrapovawvK. 7Tl,K\Ci)OoV(Ta)V (70V TV]VryVO~l,P ) Wpiae K. SiTa^6V /OVK olaOa TjXticoi/ /^epo?el Trpbs ra "O\a ; rovro 8e (headds or corrects), Kara TO o-wfia, 009 Kara ye TOV \6yovovSe %etpa)v TWV Oewv ov$e fjLiKQOTepos. Aoyou yapfjieyeOos ov fjirffcei,ov& v^ei KpiveTai d\\a Soyfuao iv.Here there is a faint inclination to the old Stoical

""Man"THE ULTIMATE PROBLEMS 115rivalry of the Sage with the gods but it leads to;nothing, and is not used to explain the presence of thiscurious power in the frail earthen vessel." Yet howoften does he make use of the appeal totopietas,"the duty of cheerful submission as to an earthly father ?of humanemphasises not the pettiness, but the dignitynature ?(47).3. Man is truly for him that indefinable andincomprehensible complexJo>oi/ \OJIKOV QVTJTOV (128).He makes no serious attempt to correlate or coordinate these antitheses ;and the individual whomaynot rank himself with the beasts finds in thisnegative and empty prerogative no admittance tothe divine company. He is armed with a passportwhich excludes him from both worlds. So in the lastresort, when the practical reason will have its say, themotive for resignation is neither fatal obedience to anabsolute tyrant or cosmic law, nor willing concession toa loving Father, but purely a matter of expediency,dXuirws d<J>6|3ws drapdxws, 145, 146). Epictetus, confidentof the answer, puts to his audience the query, H/jiiirovv \6yos eVl CLTV^LO,K. KaKo^ai^ovia SeSorai, iv a@\ioi,iva TrevOovvTes ^Lare\S)^ev ; 288: yet what is the valueof reason except, as in Marcus, to impress on us theconviction of decay, and to assure us of the vanity ofstriving 371 ; :aira^ paQtov on, TO ^evo^evov K. (f>6aprjvaiBel. In vain he assures us,is not flesh, nor hair,but Will"(ov Kpeas ov rpt^e? a\\a Trpoaipecris, 213),that the very nature of the supreme good is Will (91 :ovaia TOV ayaBov Trpoalpeais TTOIO) : its sole duty isto remove us from earthly companions and simplepleasures, and to bestow in recompense the sad privilege of contemplating the mechanism of a uni-

n6MARCUS AURELIUSverse which we can neither justify nor understand.It is in vain that the Cosmic Process is sometimesinvested with the stern and inexorable attributes ofa just Judge ;o ^oyLto? Oelos K. . . .avairoSpaa-Toseuro? e. o ra? fjieylo-ras eio-TTpao-crofAevosKo\d(rei<;irapaTWV TO, /jLeyt,<7Ta dfjuapravovrcov. . . . But in the endthese Sinaitic fulminations vanish in the pure subjectivity of reward or penalty. There is no correspondence between the deserts of man and the measure ofhis recompense ;and Virtue is in effect recognisedneither in this world nor in the next, neither by godsnor men. What is the punishment of the renegade, theapostate, the runaway ? Epictetus paints no Ajaxrdefiant even in death, but a timorous CEdipus! O avret-Owv rf)Oeia Sioi/crjo-ei, ecrra) Tcnreivos ecrro) SouXo?\V7T6io-6co (frOoveira) eXeeiTW, TOKe(f>d\aiov TTCLVTW,Svo-Tv^elro) OprjveiTo). The tone of profound pessimismcannot be mistaken ;Book iii. (p. 313) ends with theunmistakable words : Enl TOVTOV (death) ovv poi <yvfjuvd^ov,evrav0a veverwcrav ol \6yot irdvre^ ra daK^aTaTO, dvayvGoa/jLara K. elarj OVTO) /JLOVCOS ekevOepovvrai,where the study of death is the vestibule, and deathitself the gate of true liberty ;cf . 318: piav elvai/jLr)%avr)V TT/JO? eXeuOepta^ TO euKoXws dTroO^o-KeiK (a sayingof Diogenes). 387. Death is the quiet haven of allour woes ;el ovrco rd\as el^\ Xipjy TOOVTOS 8 e. o XifXTji/ TTCLVTWV, o OdvaTOS, avrr) rj. . "OravOe^ys, ef/}X^e9, K. ov Kairvity. (Is yourhearth smoking ? you can leave the house !)No wonderif to this last compliance of the Sage with a fatefulordinance he applies the word Oeios ; 127: VOGOVVTO,

"""Who""""""""THE ULTIMATE PROBLEMS 117(B) SOME MINOR POINTS ;THE PAX KOMANA THE;WOULD OF CONFLICT ;THE MORALISTIC STANDPOINT ;THE NOERIC LIFE OF GOD FUTILITY;OF MERE TECHNICAL EMANCIPATION, ETC.4. Before I close with an anticipation of hisinfluence on Marcus Aurelius, Imay notice one ortwo detached points of interest. Epictetus has quitegot rid of Seneca s perpetual declamation against Fortune, but he is a slave himself to the classicaltyrant."So constant is his reference, that we are thankful when(316) he invites us to leave Caesar alone for a moment !Edv (rot SoKy, TOV fjiev Kaicrapa Trpbs TO irdpov dcfrwfjiev.He would be inclined to deal sharply with any Socialistic Christianity, made me a ruler and a judge?Speak to rny brother," asked an applicant (52) thathe be no more angry with me OVK; e7rayye\\Tat,fylXoo-ofyia rcov e/ero? n TrepnroirjO eiv TO)dvOptoiro).He will not blame or reprove the person accused beforeothers :Bring him here and I will speak to him,"aol Se irepl rrjs e/cewov opryfjs ovSeve^&> \eyeiv. Again,advancing slightly beyond a monistic universe he believes in the Pythagorean dualism or systoechy ofantitheses whose mutual play and reaction bring tobirth the visible world. 46 :Atera^e Se 6 epos dvaiK. %i/ji(t)va,K.K.<f>opav d<popiav, K. dpeTrjv K. KdKiav K.Trda-as ras TOiavras ei/arrioT^ras, vTrep (TV/Ji(f)a)via<;rwvf/0\o*v. 1 Similarly (94), with the same implication,%p6iav yap e%ei, /c6(7fjiov TOLOVTOV (o ^eo?), r&v eVl 77)9dvacrTpe<^o^evwv TOIOVTMV. The same commonplace canbe found in Seneca, Ep. cvii., where the like moral1See my article "Subordinate Dualism" in the Studia BiUica,vol. iv.

"""rfjs""n8MARCUS AURELIUSof acquiescence is derived from the spectacle of Nature sviolent contests and uncertainty:Natura autem hoc quod vides regnum mutationibustemperat ;nubilo serena succedunt,. . . flant invicem venti,noctem dies sequitur. . . ;contrariis rerum ^Eternitas constat.Ad hanc legem Animus noster aptandus est ;. . .qusecumquefiunt debuisse fieri .putet.. . Hanc rerum conditionen mutarenon possumus; id possumus, magnum sumere animum . . .quo fortiter fortuita patiamur et Naturce consentiamus . . .optimum est pati quod emendare non possis, et Deum quo"auctore cuncta proveniunt sine murmuratione comitari !5. He is on occasion less of an Intellectualistthan most Greek thinkers, and prefers, in his stress onpractical life and happiness, a useful error to the glareof truth.the lie18: El dp ecuraTY]0eVTa eoei paOelv ( = "in the soul")on rwv CACTO? aTrpoatpercov ovoev e. 717309?7/4a9, eyob pev r\Qe\ov ri]v dirdTYjy ra,vrt\v ef 179 r//i,eXXoz>evpoax; K. aTapd%co<; fii,a)o~ea6cu vfjiels 8 otyeo~0 avrol riOe\Te and (/8) finds the differentia of man to theanimal world not in the epithet voepos or \oyi,Kos, butin moral qualities 8 9 : Tim ovv; Siacfrepei, ; opa . . . firjTW TrapcLKoKovOeiv 0*9 Troiei,ra>opa fir) KOivaviKq), pr)TO) TTicrTft),TO>al$r)/jiovi, TO) aafaXel, ro5 o~vvera> ;and itis this differentia that prescribes, as ifby the fingerof God, his function, and, therefore, his blessedness andend. IIov ovv TO jAeya ev avOpooTroi? Katcov K. aya0bv ;OTTOV r)AIA4>OPA. He has much in common with Christian ideas as well as much that iswholly inadmissible :(j)i\oo~o<f)ia$ (134) Trapd ye rot? o>9 Sel . . . CLTTTOvTTj^yavva[/(7Br)OL<;avrov d(r6eveia<$ K. dSvva-Trepl ravayicala. This sense of inner want, ofunrest and sin, sends them to the Lecture Hall ;andthis discipline will at first increase their pain rather

""THE ULTIMATE PROBLEMS 119than remove its cause. 285: larpeiove.avSps, TO TOVou Set TJaOeVras e^\6etv aXX*(f)i,\oo-6(f)ov O"%o\eiov6. In one passage he distinctly seems to recognisein the middle of the purely physical eKirvp^cr^ orKagnarok,"a noeric life of God independent of hisfaithful counterpart, the visible universe (a passagerecalling Dio Chrysostoms oration on the decay andrenovation of the world), Zeus does not bewailhimself or his loneliness : TaXo-9 e ovre7<w rrjv Hpave^a>OVTC Trjv ^AOrjvav ovO* . . . vlov . . .rj ovyyevf) ! "For men judge him only by his beneficent functions,aTTO TOV (j)V(TLKOiVWVlKOV elvdl. Ov$V fjTTOV SetTiva K.TT/JO?TOVTO TTapaaKevrjv e%ei,v,TO BvvaaOaiavTov eavTU) dpKii>,eavTO) avveivat, w? o Zevs auro?eavTO) o~vv6<TTiv, K. rjO V xd^ei, efieavTOv K. evvoel$ioticr]<Tiv Trjv eavTov o ia e. K. ev lirivoiaiQTrpeTrovcraiskavTw. Here is a dim trace of Aristotelianinfluence, with which school, as the most sober andHellenic in classical times, the Porch, Oriental, andpessimistic, had least in common, and was always atfeud.7. He recognises yet circumscribes the externalbenefits of Csesarism in a striking passage. 243 :*OpaTeyap ort flptfvrjv ^eyd\r)v 6 Kaicrap TJ/JLIV BOKCL Trapeze ivOTI OVK elelv OVKTI 7ro\e/jLOi, ovSe l^a^alovbe \rja-TTjpiaov&e 7TipaTiicd a\X* eJ*eaTiv Trdo-rj wpq oSevew,air dvaTo\wv eVt Suayi-a?. But can he save youfrom fever, shipwreck, earthquake, lightning1 Fromlove, grief, envy 1 No, in this alone can philosophygive exemption, and provide a safe prophylactic ;ensuring an inward peace, VTTO TOV eov teeter;pvyfievrjv&ia TOV \6yov. And as he would have rejected any

""Who""""""120 MARCUS AURELIUSmodern scheme of elevating the masses by change ofenvironment, as he surrendered over the whole worldof things and chattels to the strong hand withoutcriticism or expostulation, their proper lords andmasters (eiceLvtov /cvpios),so he would discountenancethe Eeform movement which at one timesaw salvationin the multiplied vote. 319: O f SoOXo? evOvs ev^eraidfaOfjvcu eXevQepos ..." * Av afaOti (frijaiv,evOvsTraaa evpota, ouSeVo? eTTicrrpe^ofjiat,, Traaiv 0)9 IVo? K.OIJLOIOS XaXw, Tropevo/jLCu OTTOV 6e\co, ep^ofjiai,orav 6eXa)."Then comes the disillusionment, as the white slavesof England, or the emancipated serf in Eussia. Elraa7rr]\ev@epa)Tai, K. evOvs /juev ov/c e^oivtrol (frayy fyrelTiva Ko\aKev<rrj K. TTacryzira Seivorara |XTreiTTWK els8ou\idv iroXu Ttjs TTpoTepas %a\67TQ)Tepav: the whole longpassage isinteresting and significant.(C) HAEMONY BETWEEN EPICTETUS AND MARCUSAURELIUS8. If we have fully mastered the secret maxims orthe open counsels of Epictetus, we have already inanticipation understood Marcus Aurelius. They distinctly stand in the relation of master and pupil and;the slave has taught the purple-born the solitarypathway to Indifference. All the special dogmas agree,as well as the main points: the distinction of mineand not mine," the unity of the Greater Commonwealth,and the duty of submission. From Epictetus, Marcuswill borrow his constant query,is there to prevent you?" (rfc // avay/cdcrei ; 78); his belief innatural tendency of all men to the good, 217; the pleafor specific knowledge and analysis of particulars, 200;

THE ULTIMATE PROBLEMS 121the blaming neither God nor man, 173; the uselessnessof books and logic, 163, 164 ;the scanty influence ofthe Sage on others, except as a silent model, 110 ;thecontempt of the body and its parts the; physical interpretation of death s meaning ; philosophy as a merestudy of this last moment ; and, in spite of all, the firmhold on Providence. All these minor resemblances andpoints of contact and the common atmosphere of wistful and pietistic resignation, convince us of the essentialharmony between the philosophy of 1emperor and slave.1The references throughout in Epictetus are to the pageslatest Teubner edition.of the

PART III.THE CREED OF MARCUSAURELIUS ANTONINUSCHAPTER ITHE TEACHING OF THE EMPEROR;OF MAN THE AGENTTHE NATURE(A)CHIEF CHARACTERISTICS OF HIS MEDITATIONSDUE TO HIS OFFICE AND HIS TIMEANALYSIS1. Troubled period of history ; melancholy tone.2. Such temper the natural result of complex and well-equippedcivilization.3.Deadening effect of order and security under Flavian andAntonines (70-180) straitened ; outlook; relief in Mysticism.4. Dulness of Socialist routine; sadness of Aurelius ; his Asceticdualism.5. No genuine interest in the world; his writings, a privatestimulant to his own flagging faith.6. Earnest yet Sceptical tone; his supreme duty, not to God, theworld, or society, but to himself.1. NOTHING can well be more interesting to theordinary mind than the meditations of a king. Wemay expect from them the result of a ripe, a complex,

"TEACHING OF THE EMPEROR 123a unique experience, as of one who has mounted tothe summit of the hill, and, embracingall the sides ofthe landscape below in which we severally play ourless conspicuous part, can look beyond in a wider surveyon the nature of things and the future destinyand the race. Yet the meditations of kings are by nomeans frequent, and their verdict on life and experienceis universally sad. Exceptional opportunities of comprehensive view seem never to result in buoyancy orcheerfulness. The sense ofof monohaving achieved,"of mantonous enjoyment of stationary dignity, the circumscription of the regal power of doing good, the hollownessof court life, combine to produce a peculiar temper ofmind apathetic, tolerant, and cynical and ironic. Sotrue is it that all pleasure lies in process, in graduallydrawing nearer a never-realised goal or ideal ;for inthe moment of attainment satisfaction dies. The Bookof Ecclesiastes may surely represent,if not the exactwords, at least the traditional attitude of KingWe Solomon.may, indeed, detect in it the effect of that Orientalsadness conspicuous in most Greek philosophers, whichforms so striking a contrast to the sober yet abidingoptimism of the Jewish character. But there is nothingimprobable in the tone, dispirited and disillusioned,which marks off this from all other Canonic Scripture.It is entirely suitable to a peaceful and opulent monarchwho has never been braced by war or other emergency.Ennui and lassitude follow of necessity the certainfruition of good things; and Leopardi is profoundlytrue when he depicts Zeus sending disease and misfortune to men, not to make lifemore painful, but thatthey might be reconciled to it through hope, anxiety,suspense, and change. In such times of peace the

"124 MARCUS AURELIUSMarcus Aurelius, ourreign ofphilosopher-king," certainly did not fall. The realm of Nature, with earthquakes, famines, pestilences, allied with the Danubianbarbarians to disquiet the land. The Parthian war,in which his colleague Verus took an unworthy part,was an almost annual pageant or tournament of theRomans, like much of our traditional feud with France;neither combatant was serious. But the Quadi mightwell seem to Aurelius to be in deadly earnest. Tacitushad believed that Rome had no hope unless shecould keep these tribes quarrelling internally in a purposeless animosity, which should avert their covetouseyes from the treasure-house of civilization The!Emperor could not have been ignorant either of thefears of the historian or of the real menace of theseuntamed tribes. Yet, though his time is amply filledwith all that complex public service of the State nowcentred on the shoulders of one man, with benefactions,orphanages, foundling hospitals, and campaigns, there isthe same profound melancholy in the busy sovereignthat we detect in the satiety of Solomon. Gibbonbelieves in the extreme felicity of the Antoninian age ;but, while we have instruments for testing and registering human sensitiveness to pain, we have none sodelicate as to chronicle the excess or defect of happiness.2. What is to be our criterion ?Certainly notoutward prosperity, or even advance of culture, sanitation, comfort, letters. Who nowadays supposes thatthe Italian peasant is happier (whatever we may meanby that figurative and elusive term) under the newregimen than in the careless squalor, the light-heartedease, of the days before unification ? It is the slavewho has a native minstrelsy, not the citizen. Blithesome

"""TEACHING OF THE EMPEROR 125gaiety, which is one mark of happiness, belongs to a lowand imperfect stage of civilised life, we are told ;but ifit isgone or superseded, it is difficult to say what anation gets in compensation. Order, security, permanence, yet it is idle to deny that what averagehuman nature demands is uncertainty, room for privateventure and endeavour, and not the stereotyped monotonous comfort of equitable distribution. It is not thedecay of belief which makes much of modern literaturepessimistic ;it is the vanishing of hope, the shrinkingof the globe, the elimination of that mystery, half fear,half eager and delighted expectancy, which surroundsthe unknown world, and urges us to penetrate the realmsof romance or actual enterprise. It is under despoticmonarchies, that is, in nations in an incomplete state ofdevelopment, that the dazzling vision of Grand Wuziror Chief Sultana haunts the waking dreams of the slaveboy or slave girl.The tendency of all well-orderedcommunities is to crystallize into caste. The spirit ofthe knight-errant or boy-hero of adventure evaporateswith the certainty of life and estate. The ideal of mostinhabitants of countries essentially democratic, such asFrance, Eussia, China, the United States, is a placeunder Government and the son of these ; permanentofficialshas no ambition except to follow in his father scautious but uninteresting footsteps. The sudden riseof the mediaeval administrator and churchman, thecareer veritably open to the talents/ strikes us againand again, in reading the origins of European society,with a strange sense of contrast to the present day ;possible, indeed (for is not everything open to theworthiest in our society ?), yet extremely improbable ;and as the axiom of equality is now everywhere assumed

"""man"man126 MARCUS AURELIUSand conceded, we lack all those signal instances ofsuccessful merit which roused our admiration in theearlier days of Christendom. There is no actual bar tosuch ascent to power and responsibility; but the approachmust be less rapid, more measured and continuous, andat the end of a prosperous family career the third indescent may look forward to the dignified retirement ofthe House of Commons. A standard of mediocreattainment has superseded the exceptional brilliance ofsome favoured and infrequent individual. The nationgains, and is all the more secure for this curtailment ofpossibilities but the interest of life; dwindles, and theclasses, in spite of some show of social intermixture,remain at core impenetrable and unsympathetic. TheGeneral Post and topsy-turvydorn anticipated by thepoliticalreformers of themeans been verified.nineteenth century has by no3. Now, the Koman Empire, in spite of the plutocratic basis of society and taxation, was far moredemocratic in itstemper and its possibilitythan weshall see Europe in our lifetime. The highest post inthe State was open to anyone but the entire policy;of the successors of Galba, Otho, Vitellius, first theFlavian dynasty, next the Antonines, had to eliminatethis awful risk of theof talent,"theof thehour," by a steady and uniform succession of adoptedheirs. 1 Did this regularity rob life of its zest, while it1Diocletian found himself obliged to repeat this practice after theturmoil of half a century, without in theory abandoning the principlethat the supreme office, the baton of the Empire, was in every soldier shaversack ;hence the anomaly of a hereditary dynasty which yetexcited no passionate loyalty. For the ideal was still republican,impersonal, abstract whereas;to-day our interest frankly centres roundour First Family, by right of immemorial lineage.

"""TEACHING OF THE EMPEROR 127cleared it of the danger of excited competitors ? Theliterature of the second century is just everything exceptcivic or political. It is much like our own, though soincomparably scantierthe same keen curiosityfor theoccult, the personal, the romantic, the religious, thesatirical ;and behind this frivolous foreground thesilent, patient, inexorable work of the Eoman legists,who were folding the coils of custom, prescription,routine, round the limbs of a tired world, a worldwhich would one day wake up and remonstrate. Inthis most freely organized community, or group of equalStates, the deadening effects of order and security werefound at work. Decay and dwindling of the population,lack of interest in civic concerns, and, with a straitenedoutlook, hereditary caste of noble or official or soldierall agreeable to the present safety, but adverse to thefuture welfare of an imperial people. The horizon, onceboundless and full of mystery, became fixed and crystalas in cosmic life the infinite universesline ; justIonia, born and destroyed in infinitetime," werereplaced by the well-ascertained frontiers and modestextent of Aristotelian (and therefore all mediaeval)cosmogony. The impulse towards Christianity was byno means universally a longing for moral regeneration,but in great part the desire of a fresh domain, "newworlds to conquer."We see this clearly in the speculative eagerness of the Gnostics, multiplication of theBasilidian heavens, the increased zest of esoteric mysteries, all coupled with indifference to conduct.4. So far as a worldly power can, the Empiresatisfied its children, giving them order, sustenance, andamusement ;but it could not protect them from thedulness and satiety of Socialism, or from the mis-of

"""man128 MARCUS AURELIUSchievous effects of its own gifts, its own over-conscientiousvigilance. 1 To the Sovereign this sense of wearinessand fatigue carne more acutely than to others. Hestood alone (as he tells us himself) in the midst ofmen with whom he had nothing in common. Let usat least hope they had some satisfaction even on alower scale ;for it is clear that their master possessedthe unfortunate faculty of taking his chief delight inmelancholy. We know not which is the predominantnote of hismeditations,"a constant appeal to bear theinevitable with patience, nay, even with devout resignation ;or a contemptuous vilification of the material,the details, the occupations, the pleasures of humanlife. While he protests that the universe is a singlewhole, animated in all its parts by the same spirit oflife and order and permanence through change, noGnostic or Christian ascetic can exceed the harshnessof the language for the poor inoffensive frameworkwhich encircled and (as he felt it) imprisoned hisVital Spark of Heavenly Flame." In order to keephimself free from any suspicion of attachment to theflesh, he seeks to excite his own disgust with thefoulness of human reproduction, the vanity and nothingness of human life. The Stoic School, while professingmaterialism and sensualism (in its theoretic sense), isgradually veering round to a complete Platonic Dualism,of the visible substrate and the unseen spiritual energy.While avowing adhesion to the formula,a1The invaders rebelled against this childish tutelage, while respectingthe outward forms ;and this will explain the curious anomaly of theMiddle Ages, which show the profoundest reverence for ideals, ofChurch, of Empire, of Christendom, never restraining for a momentthe passionate and lawless egoism of everyday life, the most absolutedivorce of practice and theory.

TEACHING OF THE EMPEROR 129political and social it succeeds in being,"detaching theinterest of the individual from social life ;in whichafter all manhood lies, with its tolerance, self-restraint,and endeavour for a common good.5. Marcus in his self-centred aloofness from anyreal concern in the world, is the true and unmistakabledisciple of the Porch. But, like all the Romanproselytes, he takes this dogma much more seriouslythan the Greeks. The unruffled calm, the deliberateconsistent life in which the Ideal of the Hellenic worldwas to be realised, was common to all the later schools :the especial creed was a matter of temperament, ofconvenience, of logic, but scarcely of conviction.Marcus, educated as a devout Roman to belief in godsof the earth and nation, finds himself confronted by aMonistic interpretation of the world, which excludesprayer, or the hope of immortality. 11 I read with extreme surprise in the Expository Times, May 1902,the following words :"Noblyone were they (Biedermann and Lipsius)in championing the cause of scientific theology. Where they mainlydiffered was that Biedermann disallowed alike the personality of God andthe continuance or persistence of the individual spirit, both of whichLipsius strenuously It must be evident to theupheld."merest tyro in"philosophy or religion that we have here the ultimate and absolute polesof thought, and that there can be no truce or compromise between thetwo disputants. To apply the term "theology to Biedermann s systemis a sacrilege and an absurdity. Except for the thin veneer of sentiment, which even in a Schleiermacher failed to hide the true outline ofhis desponding creed, it is indistinguishable from the grossest materialism, fails to supply any single adequate motive for moral action (whichthough natural and instinctive requires some encouragement and justification for its abandonment of the obvious law, "Might is Right"),and isunworthy of the term "Religion"at all. For Religion impliesa personal relation between the worshipper and the object of his worship,and is incompatible with any theory of Emanation and Reabsorption ;for personalities (which constitute the sole ultimately real experience)may harmonize, but cannot merge or interpenetrate.9

"""""Way""130 MARCUS AURELIUSHe writes hismeditations or commentarieshimself to comfort his soul in the stress of doubt, toremind it that Ethics are independent of inetaphysic ;that whatever the constitution of the Universe, one,manifold or chance, the likelihood of survival or dissipation, the careful guidance or neglect of the gods,the ingratitude of our fellow-men, one course aloneremained open to him, to follow right at all costs andall hazards, from a duty owed partly indeed to theInscrutable Cause of all, but mainly to himself andand of work which he loves tothat conscience of Dutycall theDeity within."6. Two very interesting points emerge, then, fromthis earnest yet sceptical tendency ; first, that in spiteof its threatened dissolution it is his own personalitythat really concerns him, a self-absorbed introspectivebrooding on theof Salvation," to which thosesocial acts (/cowcoviKal Trpafet?) appeal, not from loveof one s neighbour, but from a stern dutyto one shigher self ;and next, that from the blank and dumbfatalism of objective Nature (where Stoics sought Godin a physical power), the soul of man was repelled, andforced into seeking for himself a nearer and a morepropitious deity. In Stoicism proper we have a coldand scientific theology,"which in essence differs notfrom materialism ;in Aurelius we have Logic andEmotion, Pure Reason and Faith, contesting for themastery in a bosom agonizing with conflict of doubtsand hopes. In Platonism we mark reaction to adoctrine, which though highly scientific in outline, isintensely emotional in essence. Briefly, Stoic Positivism ;then Marcus incongruous (yet so sincere !)admixturetoof science and faith;next, the pure subjective certainty

"""TEACHING OF THE EMPEROR 131of Platonism, where theDesire of Mankindfound in no outer communicable system, fortified bylogic and preserved by iterated maxims, but withinthe soul itself, secure and permanent, in everlastingcompanionship.We have in the foregoing brief introduction to adetailed inquiry into Aurelius tenets, maintained thatthe peculiar tone of melancholy pervading the volumeis to be expected from a philosopher aboveking,"all, from a reflecting Eoman Caesar in that epoch oflethargy. We have seen how nearly the circumstancesof his time correspond to our own ;and how little theremoval of political disabilities or the assurance of acompetence can reconcile men to a life which, deliveredindeed from anxiety, is also robbed of all hope. Wehave ascertained that in the peculiar system to whichhe attached himself in common with all earnest Romans,there was no satisfaction for a pious and an affectionatenature ;and there is left for us (after hinting at theconsiderable step which the Emperordirection of Platonism) to examine closelyistook in thehis ofteninconsistent views on man s nature, or the human soul,the human personality. For this is the real startingpointof all the subjective schools. 11We may here insert as an illustration of modern Stoicism thefollowing remarks of Mr. Norman Pearson (Nineteenth Century, May1895), which already to us sound strangely confused and archaic :of existencewhich is inspired to struggle upwards by a power which makes forrighteousness." "His relations to such a power would be outraged bypetitions for the disturbance of this order." "To man, as the last andhighest product of this scheme, its due progress seems to be speciallycommitted ; consequently, conduct which impedes his own struggleupward, is not only an offence against his own highest interests, but isa Sin against the order of the Universe. . . .Feeling will in due course

""132 MARCUS AURELIUS(7>)INFLUENCEOF THE CONCEPTION OF ^070?ON GREEK THOUGHTANALYSIS1. Personal need the starting-point of practical philosophy ,\6yos = principle of order and consistency) gradually personified.2. Incurable""teleologyof the Classical period ;(frvo-is and \6yosbecome interchangeable terms (at least, inseparable correlates).3. In progress of Stoicism, \6yos tends to become detached andtranscendent; frank adoption of strict Platonic dualism;Manichcean atmosphere.% 4. For this dualism, Gnostics had some fanciful explanation ;Stoics none; Aurelius only kept by his busy lifeand Romantraining from complete surrender of the actual.1. All philosophy, all science, springs from thedesire to accommodate and explain the world to theself. A purely disinterested search for Truth hasprobably never entered into the heart of man." Thejoy of knowledge and discovery, the control of naturalforces, or the necessity of satisfying the deeper needsof the heart, such are the motives which impelledHellenic speculation. It is in the main purely personalor subjective ;and of no school is this more true thanof Aristotle s successors. All Greek thoughtis anattempt to find the ^0709 in things, in words, in theState,in man s soul and life. With an almost endlessfollow in the footsteps of Thought ;and the prayer of the future willbe attuned to those higher conceptions which religious thought hasalready reached. Not less reverent, though more robust than theprayer of to-day, it will embody the religious aspiration of man,trained, indeed, to a truer apprehension of Nature and Nature s God,but freed from the trammels of theological dogma and priestlymediation ;and thoughitmay draw man away from the altar, it willlead him nearer to the throne !

"""""""DRIFT TOWARDS MYSTICISM 133and perplexing variety of meanings, it always conveysthe sense of order, method, consistency ;and was freefrom all personal connotation. It was the universalnotion that underlay and bound together the complexof individual phenomena the definition which must be;ascertained before the discussion of terms can proceed ;the deliberate policy, therationale,"orraison d etreof a community the order and ;harmony that Heraclitusdetected amidst the chaos of the empirical world;theself-congruous fitness and consistency which appearedclearly in all behaviour and action, when one haslearnt to refer all to a single aim, and to subordinateevery minor detail of life to a guiding principle. Littleby little this purely logical and abstract term acquires akind of objective existence and a mystical significance ;and we cannot wonder that in the Hellenistic writers,whether Pagan, Jewish, or Christian,with a person, and becomes, in languageit is identifiedeither literalor symbolical, not the discovered synthesis of things,but the actual Creator and Sustalner of the Universe.Now, in the dogmatic creed of the Stoics, the terminto this finalisA6<yo<$ employed just before it passesand mystic stage. It is the world-order, the principleof life, and permanence through change ; appreciableby man, because he alone partakes in consciousness ofthe same spiritual force which regulates the world ;asin the well-known saying, Like is known bylike."2. The Philosopher, conscious in himself and in hiscommunity of certain fixed principles, looked afield inthe wider world for a similar reign of Law." Thefortuitous infinities of Ionia (with its astounding! ybefore thatmodern guesses at Evolution) pass awaycurious and abiding phase of thought, which I may

1soon"134 MARCUS AURELIUSperhaps term the incurable or invincible teleologyof theGreeks. So we get to the limited universe of Aristotle;and to the unshaken conviction that everything createdhad a purpose and a meaning and that the secret of;its happiness or satisfaction lay in discovering the causeand the object of its being, and in doing its duty."We may pause a moment to wonder at the admirablesimplicity of mind which tolerated this fundamentalassumption. Every colloquy with a Sceptic or a\ Sophist was ended in favour of the Rationalist, soas he had secured the admission that Nature hadan end, each thing an epyov, or in the most popularform of the thought that rj tyvcns ovftev /jidrrjv iroiel.This Nature or this ^0709 were interchangeable terms ;and while the former retained all that notion of spontaneous energy and beneficent creativeness whichAristotle gave it, the latter, as we have seen, was froma cloudy or logical abstraction gradually assuming thelineaments of a Personal Intelligence.13. The Stoics, starting from complete materialism,recognised but a single Principle but the ineradicable;dualism of intelligence sets itself, and that which it feelsakin and cognate to itself, in violent contrast to the unconscious and formless substrate. The ^070? of the worldtends more and more to detach itself from its works, andfrom being immanent and implicit in things to becometranscendent. It is doubtful ifany system that hasenjoyed a vogue, has ever been strictly and severely1We need feel no surprise, then,it we find this A6yo$ takes thefamiliar garb of Olympian Zeus in the Syncretism prevalent throughoutthe Imperial Age on ; is, the other hand, identified with that rationalPrinciple, after whose original exemplar the World-Soul fashions hermaterial in complete docility.

"""DRIFT TOWARDS MYSTICISM 135Monistic, The common consciousness assures us, withthe early Pythagorean systcechy, or groups of opposites,with conthat things are in pairs; and we may saysiderable truth, that most modern thought, and allmodern endeavour, rest on a Dualistichypothesis."Stoicism, imported into Eonian territory, adoptedfrankly the opposition of matter and spirit, in a word,Platonisui ;and the nature of man suffered a likeschism, for which the unnatural or theatrical austeritiesof the earlier heroes have already prepared us. Whenwe read Seneca or Epictetus or Aurelius, we feel weare in a Manichsean atmosphere. The aim of theindividual ^0709 is to unite itself (not, indeed, toohastily or with undue impatience) to the universal^0709 exterior nature, with its blunt carelessness of:our wishes or deserts, seems to be too dangerous groundfor us to repose on we must abandon; it, though stillmurmuring the commonplaces of its divine order andarrangement. For our own physical frame no languageof contempt was too exaggerated and, like some love;sick medieval saint, the Stoic recluse sighed for deliverance, while he pronounced this world perfect and unique,with no ulterior object save ceaseless repetition. Thequery of the French dramatist, Que diable allait-ilfaire dans cette galere? arises to our lips, withoutdeliberate irreverence, as applicable, not merely to thisincompetent imprisoned ray of Universal Reason, whichhad somehow fallen into the snares of matter, but alsoto the Parent of all such imperfect emanations. Itretreats further and further fromthe course of the secular series to itself.things, and abandons4. Now the Gnostics, be it remarked in passing, hadat least a logical and consistent, though fantastic answer

"""136 MARCUS AURELIUSto this problem of the intermixture of mind and matter.But the Stoics could admit no such explanations tosolve the difficulty. Their instinct (like all humanity,dualistic) was at variance with their reasoned philosophy,which pronounced things good, and descending from aSource of Life." Hand in hand the Sage andsinglehis Divine Counterpart or Original retreated from analien world, without in theory abandoning any of thetenets or axioms of the profoundest optimism andcontent. Man was made for a purpose ; but preciselywhat, it was impossible to discover ;and while thestout Koman character of Aurelius and the exigenciesof his busy and responsible position keephim stillfaithful to the social instinct, and prevent the finalplunge, yet there are not wanting symptoms of thatsomewhat morbid mysticism, which elevates as thesupreme goal of the rational being the overcoming ofits otherness in unconscious ecstasy, reunion withUniversal Eeason.(C) THE CONSTITUTION AND PSYCHOLOGY OF THEINDIVIDUALANALYSIS\ 5. In Stoic world, everything necessary and perfect, each in itsseveral place; you may neither complainreform.nor hate nor\ 6. Only in Man may service be voluntary as well as compulsory ;man s "freedom" ;he owes this (doubtful) blessing to hisshare in \6yos ; yet in no true sense is he critic or agent.I 7. Aurelius has no sympathy with Matter, no account of therelation of Soul and Body;sole interest in Spiritualpart.8. Problem of Psychology ;how many divisions in soul? (increas-

""""PSYCHOLOGY OF THE EMPEROR 137ing tendency in Monism to multiply differences rather thanreconcile contrasts).9. (Are vovs and fjyfpoviKov interchangeable ? vovs used in severalsenses.)10. Instantaneous Conversion ; Spirit always free ifit will :Solipsism no ; quality, substance, or relation in outer things ;Spirit s thoughts on things alone real.11. "Asmany worlds as spirits" ; how is this imprisoned rayof Deity our very self? (transition from intellectual tomoral differentia).12. But Pantheism, intellectually incontestable, is morally inconceivable ;Aureliushad no resource in Metempsychosis; hisSpiritthe moral personality.% 13. (Some uses o/^ux 7 ? in higher sense, The Inner Self.14. His psychology has no pretence to consistency (hints even of afourth element);Aurelius errs in good company.5. In this realm of law (without a lawgiver) everything has its appointed place. There is no evil, foreverything is necessary, and contributes to the welfareof the whole, else it would neither exist nor happen.The special function of each is to be found in itsdifferentia," that quality or faculty which marks it offfrom the rest of creatures. On nothing can you passjudgment, because nothing in such a world is superfluous or disorderly. Even unlovely or terrible things,as the menacing grin of leonine jaws, have their ownappropriate use and intrinsic beauty ;and are not tobe set aside as bad merely because they do not fit inwith our selfish ideas of human convenience. Likeall Pantheists, Antoninus is a stranger to that anthropocentricconception of the world on which Europeancivilization and Christian faith is founded. As to theultimate equality of things, good and bad (as thewords are currently employed), their indifference,"this doctrine recalls the modern school, which explains

138 MARCUS AURELIUSthe seeming conflict of ultimate principles as a merepassing phase, which gathers up and embraces theturmoil and contrast of a lower sphere in the peaceand silence of the Absolute. If to complain of sucha world is impiety, so, too, is it to attempt to alter orreform it. As there is no questioning of the ways andmethods of Providence, so the very notion of change,improvement, progress is altogether eliminated. Eachthing is in its place ;its character and circumstancesare all divinely appointed by that Power which mayeither, once and for all, have settled on the course ofevents, and written out in anticipation the whole bookof destiny, or with careful and particular solicitudemay be even now guiding everytrivial detail of theworld s course ;Marcus will not venture to decidewhich of these views iscorrect.6. But clearly in man s special conformation there isThe rest of the creasomething exceptional and peculiar.tures form an orderly but unconscious retinue in the trainof the King.Their service is perfect indeed, but involunand automatic. With man enters a new factor : thattaryalmost invisible point of Freedom, which at once tells ofhis close affinity to the Universal Intelligence, and alsopermits him to criticize The it.impulse to philosophicthought is curiously interwoven of the passionate desire tobe free and the correlative yearning to discover and obeythe Highest Law ;and all searchers after truth are likeSaint Christopher. Man has this double power ;of valuing and admiring the works of Creation,first,all theStoics placing the precarious paradise of immortal heroesin closer contemplation of the mysteries of stars andtheir orbits ; second, of determining himself freely andwithout reserve, in the very limited realm of Liberty

"""""""PSYCHOLOGY OF THE EMPEROR 139still left to him in the universal dominion of physicallaw. This very doubtful privilege he owes to hisparticipation in the ^0709 indeed, the conscious:spectator of the world, the deliberate moral agent, mayrepresent but the waking vision of a SomnambulistCreator. Is Reason, is the will-to-live, startled andamazed when, reaching consciousness in man, it beholdsthe universe which its blind and undirected efforts havecalled into being ? This is clearly a modern andromantic belief, which we should not try and discoverin the system of Aurelius ;but we may mention it here,to show how assailable, how open to logical attack, ishis doctrine on human nature. Critic, he is forbiddento speak ; agent, he is restricted by ascetictaboofrom finding enjoyment even in the innocent diversionsof life, and confined in a narrow prison-house ofnon-His nature is conceivedpossumus." as abrupt dualism ;his ethics is limited to passivity and resignation.7. An English bishop and Christian apologist haspronounced our body to be a mass of matter withwhich we are for a time associated and most;Idealists would relegate it, with all its pleasures andpains, to the dim phantom -region of the external world,neither more nor less cognate to us, nor more nor lessapproaching true being emphatically like it, a Thing.;The same sense of foreignness be found inmayMarcus, who is far more an idealist than any predecessor in the Stoic School ; who, as we have seen, hasnot yet reached that genial Platonism which reconcilesthe two opposing factors ;has no knowledgeof theChristian faith which somehow can consecrate thelower element while keepingit in proper subordination.He exhausts on this innocent envelope of the striving

""""""140 MARCUS AURELIUSspirit all the vocabulary of sarcasm, innuendo, contempt ;he might well be Saint Thomas a Kempis. We mayhere repeat what was said under a similar heading inEpictetus, that no Gnostic, no early Christian ascetic,could write more severely ;and we shall substantiatethis by a fuller examination. For he never accuratelydefines matter, or enters into the difficult problem ofthe interaction of soul and body ;we must thereforepass to the unseen or spiritual part of man, if we wishto find his function and his differentia."8. Now here we are met by a considerable difficulty,for Marcus makes not the slightest effort to be consistent. Sometimes the invisible and truer portion ofman is twofold, as with us, body and soul at; others,it is, like our body, soul, and spirit,"threefold. Nowwe find soul (^f%^) violently opposed to the higherprinciple, as the vital element of mere animal life now;it includes it, or is even identical. Now it is true thatwe are perfectly familiar with this looseness ;for it isonly on occasion that we find in Scripture the tripledefinition ;and generally and in common parlance weare quite satisfied with the popular dualism. But ina system avowedly monistic, we are puzzled when wemeet with this increasing tendency to multiply differenceand accentuate, rather than reconcile, contrasts. Butit is not without significance ;our honest and sincerestudent of human nature cannot really find satisfaction himself in the Unitarian tenets he professes. Ourmodern society and hopes of progress rest upon a senseof otherness and conflict, and not upon any fatiguedor impatient assumption of oneness. In iii. 16 wefind crwfjia, ^v^f), vovs o~a)/j,aTos aia-Otfo eis, ^jrv^fj^vov BojfjiaTa, sensations, impulses, principles.

"""PSYCHOLOGY OF THE EMPEROR 141To be impressed with phantasies, we have in commonwith the beasts;to be at the mercy of thepulls ofimpulse (vevpoaTraaTeiaOai), with beasts and bad men ;while even the bad use vovs as guide to obvious duties.In ii. 2 there is the same division, the^L>%?)now beingtermed Trvevpariov, and closely allied with the lowernature : Whatever I am, crap/aa earl K. TrvevpaTLov,Kal TO Hyepovifcov. Despise the first ;see what thesecond is ! a breath, a vapour, nor always the same,but each moment exhaling and again inhaled. Thirdis the Ruling Principle ; thou art old ;suffer this nolonger to be a slave." So in xii. 3 : rpia eaTw ef wv(TvveaTrjKas tra)fiaTiov irvevfMLTLOv vovs: of these thefirst two are ours only so far it is our ; duty to tendthem (f^expl TOV eVtyLteXeto-^at Sew*) ;but the third aloneis truly our own (TO Be TOLTOV fjbovov icvpla)? crov).Forthe two other elements he also has TO TrepuceL^evov0-Q)fJ,aTiOV, TO (7Vfji(f>VTOV TTVeV/JLCiTlOV.I 9. Now we may ask, are vovs and riyepoviKov interchangeable terms ? (for again in iii. 3 we find the highercalled vovs and BalfKov, the lower, including ^v^rj,with customary fervour, 777 K.\v0po$). Not always ;for in x. 24, instead of the ffye/*. being our supremeGuide, a god within, itappears more like an innersanctuary which we have to keep clean Tl ea-Ti;pot TOHyefjLoviicov ; what am I making of it at this moment ?to what use am I putting it ? is it empty of Mind ?icevov Nov e o-Tt),is it (CLTTO^VTOV K. aTceo-^io-pevovdivorced from the bond of fellowship ?Surely not (Trpoa-TeTrjKos K. ava/ceKpapevov TO) o-apKiSlay)engrossed and ingrown into the flesh ? It is clearfrom this that Marcus employs vovs in two differentsenses (a) identical with 1776/4. (in the soul); (/3)

"""""""142 MARCUS AURELIUSreferring to the higher Universal Reason, in theAverroistic usage, into which man has indeed aninlet ;but can lose such access by sensuality. Clearly,too, he believes that the Spirit (for so Imay perhapstranslate yyefju.)can be so immersed and engrossed infleshly cares, as to lose its liberty ;unlike the G-nostics,to whom even in physical crime and degradation theuntarnished Now remains always pure ;"77 <y\wcraSeofjLMfjLo^ r) (frprjv avw/jiOTos" Yet in viii. 41, whenshowing the various hindrances we of meet," aiaOrjcrwin body, of opfjuj in animal appetite, he continues : rafjievroi rov you I Sto- ovSeis aXXo? eiwOev e/ATrobi^eiv forthis nothing in the world can touch, not fire, not steel,not tyrant, not ill-fame.1 0. But just in this there is no real divergence, forit is the voluntary servitude of the Spirit which can disgrace it, when it becomes the mere handmaid of body inlong-sighted Hedonism ;it is proof against any assaultfrom without, and becomes the victim only of itself. Oneof Marcus most striking and often iterated convictionsis that at any moment, whatever its past, Spirit canrecoverin the turning of an oyster-shell,"inthetwinkling of an eye,"this lost sovereignty. The will isalways free, and requires only to see the goodto followit. Thus we have the Socratic and Platonic optimism and immediacy of repentance ;without Aristotle scaution, truer to nature and experience, about habit andthe tyranny of custom, the gradual absorption of willits ownpower in repeated action. When freed byunaided efforts, Spirit has an immeasurable power ;itcompletely transforms the whole world, and colours itwith its own hues. What it thinks, is ;thoughts on thingsreally matter (teachingnot things, butalike of

"""""PSYCHOLOGY OF THE EMPEROR 143Epicurus and Epictetus). 1 For all the objective isneutral, an array of indifferent atoms or complexphenomena which wait for our notice, approval, interpretation, dissent, before they have any character inthemselves at all. rovro pr) v7ro\ajn/3aveTa> K. Trdvraev e%ei, (see onTTroXrjijrt,?).Now it is Spirit thatvTToKdpfBavei, passes judgment, gives verdict on thisunreal phantom, this almost imaginary objective, amirage in the desert.diminutive, iv. 39)If the poor body (always thebe cut or burned, fester or rotaway, yet let that in thee which passes judgment takeits ease (^crv^a^erco), knowing this, that what happensalike to good and bad men equallyneither bad nor good." Similarly vi. 8 : Tocan be in itselfHyefjiovifcbve. TO eavro eyelpov K. rpejrov, K. ITOLOVV [lev eavro olovav elvai Oe\r), TTOLOVV 8 eavrat fyaiveaOcunrav TOolov avrb 6e\L It can make of itselfav/ji/Baivov,what it wishes ;it can construe exactly according to itsdesire this neutral, or even chaotic and indecipherable,complex of material things. This is the pure subjectivity to which Philosophy always aspires not to;change things without not; even, perhaps, to claim fullknowledge (the ding-an-sich live apart inaccessible,and baffle our search) ;but to make things ours, toarrange the chance alphabet into a language of our owninvention. This is true freedom, and it is the substanceand sum of Stoic teaching, from its personal side.11. Now it will be seen at once that, besides1Compare, e.g., Epictetus, i. 11 : Tt 5 6rri TOVTO ; &pd ye &\\o % tinZdoZev -rnj.lv where it is the; 86yfj.a we form in fullest freedom, that is; asabsolutely representing, even creating, the external fact, which in itselfis blind and voiceless ;so ii. 16 (p. 155, Teubner): Tt oSv fj.eTO Tr^Xayos, oO dXXd r

"""144 MARCUS AURELIUSthe variation of nomenclature, there are certain gravedifficulties ; (a) there must be as many various, yetequally momentous and valid, interpretations of theworld as there are Spirits (" quot homines tot sententiaeand we have almost"), got back in the mostdogmatic of ancient schools to the sophistic standpointthat avOpayrros (each individual man) perpov cnrdvTtov ;and this recognition that subjective feeling, thoughreal and true, is incommunicable, may account for thesingularly scanty influence of Stoicism in public ; (b)again (as we have already hinted), is this Spirit, asEpictetus and Aurelius so often assure, a very portionof God, a refraction of the Universal Mind," in whichcase, how can it be our "veryown"? (aov, 8, fin.).Will it not, like the Gnostic ^Eon Christ, like theAverroistic IVoO?, in the moment of death desertthe poor contemptible clay and soul, and be reabsorbedin the great central Reservoir ? If it isthe universal (mathematical and logical) principles ofall sound judgment and right reasoning, must it notbe exactly alike and identical in all men ? In fact,we have here one of the most striking features of thistransition period, viz. the passage from an intellectualto a moral conception of the Spirit. The Spirit(whether vovs or, as Aurelius prefers, f)<ye[jiovLKov)isnot the cold speculative reason, with its uniform anduniversally valid axioms and regulations, but the moralsense recognising, indeed, pure truth and the Soj/nara,and needing logical training, but in the end, theconscience, the will, the moral personality, the specialidiosyncraticin man, rather than that typical reasonwhich is the same in all. Thus Marcus, along with theChristian teachers, becomes more moral, more personal,

"""PSYCHOLOGY OF THE EMPEROR 145and therefore involved in perpetualtrouble when hetries to identify this separate, struggling, isolated pointwith the Supreme Being.is12. Intellectually ,Pantheism is not only logical,it(as Lewes acutely remarks onmorally,Spinoza ")inevitable;it is unthinkable. Now the whole differenceof philosophic system depends on the one question,Whether the starting-point is from the moral or theintellectual side ? And Marcus, in common with therest of his age, isready to abandon all rational symmetry and dogmatism for ethical certainty, or for thisinward pertinacious conviction, which in most good menis a substitute (or no unequal compensation) for demonstrable proof. It is obvious that he is as puzzled asSpinoza about the cause of Error as; Plotinus, in theprocess of the Many from the One, in accounting forthe diversities of the Spiritual principle in men, whenall were equally divine ! He had not the readysolution, of all the East, of Plato and Pythagoras, inMetempsychosis, in the long training of the soulthrough different lives and fortunes. He shows notrace of this belief. For him, as for Emerson, thereis but one world ;he would not hear of a missionarytelling of the other world without a shudder athis impiety. He had not the Gnostic and Averroisticbelief that the divine particle in each remains uncontaminateclby corporal contact, and vanishes away, pureand indifferent, like the ^Eon Christ, from the humansufferer. To him the HyepoviKovis rather what wecall personality than intelligence. Hence his avoweddifficulties, which do honour to his candour, and remindus that perfect symmetryis unattainable unless weprefer to sacrifice truth.10

""""146 MARCUS AURELIUS13. In vi. 32 we find that the higher nature isall included in the term ^v^r). Eic o-co/juariov el/j,l K.T/TLM?}<? ;but to the one all are indifferent (dbtdfopd),to the other all that are not its own proper functions (rrjBe Biavoia dS. ocra pr) e.aim}? evepyrjfjMTa) ;and theseare entirely in its power (rrdvTa eV avrfj). HereSidvoia = ^rv^r);while in vi. 14 ^f%^, with the addition\oyiicvj, represents spirit, and o ^rv^v \oyifcrjv, KaOoXi/crjvK. 7ro\iTiKr)v Ti/jicov cares nothing for any other interest.Again, ix. 3, we have the popular dualism ; expect thehour, ev y TO ^rv^apiov crov TOV eXvrpov exTreffelrat.Similarly and in a similar context, on a peaceful departure from life, VKo\a)s TO ^v^apiov CLTTO TOV o-co/xaro?efetXetrat. Again, ^f%^ is identified with the highernature (Kendalls Inner Self), vii. 16, TO... TO 8eavTo eavTw ovtc evo^Xeiov&ev fjurj TrdOrj, where they are homonyms ; whereasin ix. 36, TO Trvev^aTiov (? -KOV) (like all other thingsunreal and transitory), aXXo TOLOVTOV,etc TOVTCOV et?TavTa yu,eTa/3aXXoz/, where itmay very well = the vitalcurrent, vivifying now one now another complex ofmatter.14. We have added these passages, but with littlehope of making the Psychology of Marcus clearer.Syncretist as he is, he adoptsfirst one and thenanother system of bipartite or tripartite division. Whenhe isspeaking of the whole human complex, he termsit, after immemorial fashion, body and soul when;he isoccupied with man s invisible life, he has to definemore guardedly. Indeed, there is not wanting traceEgo above the vital centre of animal life, apartfrom the deity within, which like some attendant on aof ansacred shrine (veaiicopos) has to keep the silver image

"Mutual""THE SPECIAL FUNCTION 147unsullied, formingthus a fourth element in the individual. But it would be easy to parallel the slightconfusion in any religious writer. Is the moral ideal,separable from the will and the personality, conceivedas a sort of Divine deposit (7rapaKara0rjK7j) to becarefully guarded ? or the very man himself, e^ow7Tft)9 ? or the voice of an inward daemon or spiritualmonitor ? He who can discriminate the intricate subtleties of such a question will be able to settle theMediaeval problem whether God created or obeyed theMoral Law;and the still older but similar questionin Plato, whether the Ideas pre-exist, and form theexemplar to the artizan Deity, or are to be identifiedwith his thoughts. The difficulty isperhaps after allpurely formal and logical.(D) MAN S FUNCTION AND PLACE IN THE WORLD:SPECIAL EQUIPMENT OF EACH BEING A KEY TOITSPURPOSE AND HAPPINESSANALYSIS15. His a priori Ideology; what is man made for?"Socialintercourse."16. "Reasonable beings made for each other"17.(list ofaxioms or"dogmas" kept ready for crisis or temptation).service, of men" (enshrined in rigid formula ; individualism excluded); what is good for whole is good, forpart.15. We have now to inquire what is the functionof this curious creature, compounded of an actualparticle of the divine essence, and of the vital forceand dust of earth, common to all animals. And herewe come to the most ingenuous assumption of the whole

"Man"""148 MARCUS AURELIUStreatise. No wonder Marcus had to have perpetualrecourse to the Soy/maTa, those fundamental and yetstartling axioms of the Stoic faith which alone couldencourage him in the disappointments and vicissitudesof life.is made for society." Again and againwith almost tedious repetition he, in his solitude andisolation, both of station and of temperament, impressesthis axiom on himself. To bring together here thepassages bearing on this teleology l may not be out ofplace, as they build up the syllogistic fabric ; Everything has an end that for which he is born is the;1 It is the same kind of teleology which anticipates all experiencewith the barren formula and syllogism: Nature can do nothingin vain, nothing wrong,""thegods could not do any injury to theircreatures." There is an absolute and exasperating want of empiricalverification : there is no real inductive inquiry at all. Every avenueto accurate knowledge, as to any comfortable use and adaptation ofphenomena, is closed by some preconceived idea as to the goodness ofGod and Nature. It is clear that the attitude of "devout resignationin Marcus and in Epictetus is entirely borrowed from popular religiosity(like the compassionateness of Secularists to-day, which is so admirableand so unreasoning). To the man racked unjustly, with every refinement of torture, and dying as he knows the death of a dog, extinguishedfor ever, the universe is yet "the best of all possible worlds,"andProvidence supreme. In such contexts and usages words cease to haveany meaning. For a fine instance of this superb adhesion to teleologicaxioms, commend me to ii. 11, where the subject is suicide and death :*7? Totei &vdpwirov TTWS &v TOVTO fiiov avQp&irov xetpwODre 5 /car dyvoiav OVT eidvia ^kv ^77 5vi>a/j.vr)d 7rpo0udiopdwaaadat.ravra, TJr&v "0\wi> 3>vais7rape?5ev &V otfr &vij/j.apTi> tfroi Trap ddvva/jLiav ?) Trap arexviav iVa rd r dyadaK. /ca/cd ^iriffTjy rots r dy. dv0p. K. rois KO.KOIS -rre^vp^vus vv^fiaivri."Nature could not"(such is his magnificent and amazing -aith),either through lack of power or lack of skill, have made such a blunderas to let good and evil indifferently befall the good and bad indiscriminAnately." almighty power which can do no wrong, and which abidesin our soul, and governs the universe !Why then this sense of painothernessthis constant solace and reminder ?andc<?Why

"TrofeTHE SPECIAL FUNCTION 149end for each ;where is the end, there is the usefulis born forand the good relatively to him ;manreciprocity and social life ; nothing that is good for thecommunity can be bad for the citizen."viii. 19 : eicaaTov Trpos TI yeyovev ITTTTOS a///7reXo9.Ti Oav/jid^ew K. o.eH\tos epel irpos TI epyov yeyova,K. ol Xofcvrol @ot, and man is born for association;ii. 1 :Teyovapev jap 717)09 avvepylav&>9w?%epe9 ... TO ovv dvTiTrpdaa-eiv aXX^Xot? Trapa fyvo~iv ;competition, self-seeking at the expense of others isunnatural." iv. 3 : ra \oyi/cd wa a\\rj\wv eveicayeyove. v. 1 6 :Ovrrep eveict-v eKaarov /career Kevaarai,7T/309 roSe (freperat, Trpbs-o(frepeTai, 8e, ev TOVTCD TOTeXo9 avrov OTTOV Se TO Te\09, eicel K. TO av^epov K.AyaOov eicdcrTw TO dpa dyaOov TOV \o<yiKov faov,f/Koivwvia. On yap TrposKoivu>viavyeyovafjiev, 7rd\atSeBelfCTai. Is it not obvious (he asks) that Ta ^eipayTCOV KpGLTTOVCOV VKeV, TO, $6 KptlTTW d\\TJ\(t)V / KpeLTTO)8e TWV (iev d^rv^odv TCL efji^v^a,TO!>V 8e e yLt^.TO,Similarly xi. 10 : Tlacrai Be ye Te^vaL TWVeve/cev Ta ^eipw TCOIOIXJIV OVKOVV K. 77 Koivrf<&vcrw. v.f30 : O TOV o\ov JVoi/9 KOLVWVIKOS. IIe7rolr)Ke yovv TaXeipco TMV KpeiTTovcov evefca K. Ta KpetTTco aXX?;Xot9(TWYipiJioo-ev. Opas ?rw9 vTreTa^e, avveTa^e K. TO KOTd%iav direveLfjiev eKdo-Tow K. TCLKpaTicrTevovTa e/9d\\r)\o)v (Tvv^yay^. vii. 55: IIpa/CTeov BeTO 6^779 TTJ KaTaaicevr) tcaTeaKevaaTai Be TCL\OLTrd TWV \oyncwv eveKev, TCL Be \oyiKa aXX^Xco^TO/juevovv TTpo^yovfJievov ev Trj TOV dv6.TO KOIVWVIKOV e. xi. 18 (i.): Elf) TCL o\a SioiKovcra el TOVTO, TCL ^elpovaKpeiTTOvwv eve/cev, TavTa Be aXX^XcoK vi. 44 :\OyiK7) K.rj

"150 MARCUS AURELIUS16. viii. 56, while denying Monopsychism and insisting on freedom and peculiar independence of eachcentre of consciousness, he allows, el KOI on fia^icrrad\\tf\(0v eveica yeyovafjLev where Kendall transl. : Be;we ever so much made for one another, our Inner Selveshave each their own sovereign rights."So viii. 59 : olavOpoyjroi yeyovaeiv d\\rf\a)v eveicev ; TJ oiodo-/ce ovv TI(f>epe.ix. 1. As a fundamental and irrefragable premise,yap rwv 6\o)v <f)vo-eo)sKaTeo~KevaKvia^ ra \oyiica ad\\ij\a)v. xi. 1 8 in a list of short maxims whichhe is ever to keep on his tongue s tip to meet any suddencrisis, on d\\rj\a)v eveicev yeyova/jiev. Thus we shallfind with the label KOIV&VIKQV or voXmgoi ,the wholeargument for man s social virtue is assumed, and the. .avyyeves irav TO \oyi/cov /crjoeaOat,. . .philosopher saved further trouble of proof.iii. 4 :f.KOIVWVIKOV .TrdvTwv dvOp. Kara rrjv TOV avOpwirov fyvcrwe. v. 29.Man is defined, without fear of doubt or denial, as\oyiicbv K. Koivwvitcbv,>ov.ix. 16: \oyitcbv /ecuTroXin/cbv %o)ov. iii. 5 :faov appevos K. TrpecrfivTov K.iroXiTiKov K.(Pco/jLaLov K.ap^ovro^.iii. 7 :voepovTroXinicov faov. vi. 14:"^fv^rj \oyt,Krj Ka6o\itcr) K.iro\inicri (as above.) vi. 44. My nature is \oyiicrj K.7To\i,nKr}. vii. 68. The present occasion is for me v\r)dperijs \oyifcr)<?K. TToXinKrjs K. TO crvvoKov re^vr)?dv6pa)7rov r)Oeov. vii. 72. "Whatever?; \oyiKrj K.TToXiTL/crj Swapis ( = the Spirit, the Inner Self) findto be neither voepov nor KOIVWVIKQV, it will despise.viii. 2 : rl 7r\eov em^ra), el TO jrapov epyov faovVOepOV K. KOlVtoVlKOV K. l&OVOfJLOV 060).17. In this perhaps tedious recital we shall atleast see (what might escape us in a translation) howprofound a conviction was this of the affinity and

THE SPECIAL FUNCTION 151mutual service of men, and how rigid the formula orlanguage which expressed it.Nothing, therefore, that happens well for the community, for the swarm, for the universe, is bad fortXcitizen, the bee, the man. v. 22 : O rfj TroXet OVK./3\a/3epov, ovBe TOP 7ro\iT7jv /SXaTrret. v. 54 : TO TQJrj av/jifapov, ovBe rfj /xeX/<rcr?7 av/ji^epei.x. 20 :x. 33 : 0X0)9 Be fie/jnnj(ro OTI rbv (fivaei 7ro\iTrjv ovBev/8Xa7TT6t o ov 7roXti> /QXaTTTet. x. 6 ovSev :jap J3\aj3epovTO) /jL6peio Tc3 oXw avfjL(f)6peLvi. 44 : Berj eprj (f)V(Ti<;\o<yircr)K. 7ro\(,TiKr], 7roXt9 K. Trdrpw &)? peefjuoL r)Pa)jjir) &)? Be dvOpcoTru) 6 KOCT/JLOS.Ta rat?ovv rat/Tats co^eX^a, fjuova e. JJLOL djaOd. vi. 45 :ocraav/jL/Saivei,, ravra TOJ ( OXco crv/ji(f)epet.

""CHAPTER IIMAN AND THE WORLD(A) THE TWO COMMONWEALTHS AND THE CITIZEN, ASAGENT OR QUIETISTANALYSIS1. Man is member of two societies, world and State (nearly alwayscarefully coupled), each with its duty, Resignation andBenevolence ;in the end, both virtues pass into mystic piety.2. (Insistence on duties to gods and men.)3. (= Passive and active side of morality.)4. (= perfect contentment ivith both;will he ever attain thisperfection ?)5. Acquiescence and Resignation at last given the chief placeamong Virtues ;Holiness and Justice include all others.1. THERE are, then, two chief relations (which willbest be described by the following series of quotations),one to the world and God, the greater city ;the other,to the lesser community, human society. Marcus isnearly always careful to couple them ; rarely do we findone apart from the other in independence. Eesignationand acquiescence in the world-order, the passive side, iscomplementary to the active side, or vigorous beneficenceand social virtue. Disappeared has all that fulminationand defiance against Fortuna which characterized themore theatrical pages of Seneca. This he has learnt152

""""MAN AND THE WORLD 153from Epictetus. Everything that comes to us is adirect providence, or our criticism is disarmed becausethe canon or rule to apply is ready. Nothing thatisaccording to nature is evil ; nothing that happensto us can make us worse therefore :every event isindifferent ;no one can hurt a man but himself."Perhaps no subject is more frequent than this twofoldconception of duty, and, Marcus being chiefly a moralist,we shall have advanced far towards a complete understanding if we notice the emphasis put upon thecorrelate virtues of Resignation and Benevolence. Thereason is in both cases the same : we are akin to theCreative Principle, and have a sparkof His essencewithin ;we are akin to our fellows here, and recognisein them the same affinity, the same sublime source oftheir being, thoughitmay be debased and shrouded.Thus we are integral parts of the greater city and thelesser ;thewhole company of rational people,"andthe cosmopolis of the human brotherhood. To thiswide diffusion of interest we may attribute the somewhat rarefied patriotism of Marcus wherein all active;endeavour for the Empire of Home and its especialto haveresponsibilities seems (save in a few passages)evaporated in a sad and neutral tolerance for everyhuman creature. We shall see in the end how theextreme comprehensiveness and universality of thisresigned and affectionate disposition leads insensibly toa self-centred attitude, the avrdp/ceia (self-sufficingness)of earlier sages ;and in our last section we shall showhow this, agreeably to the unselfish and feminine natureof the Emperor, passes again into a mystic and almostecstatic consciousness that the true home of God is thehuman soul;the true end of man, not mere acquies-

154 MARCUS AURELIUScence in fate nor work among the brethren, but theserene contemplation of the soul s essential onenesswith the Author of all. Thus the twofold duty, orrecognition of the objective State and Law, greater andless, gives way before the new or newly-read teachingof the Deity within for the call to ; philosophyis notthe misery of the world of men, or the beauty orinexorable sequence of Nature, but the personal needof peace and salvation.2. ii. 15 :(Best service of God within is) icaQapovTrdOovs Siarripeiv. . . tc.Svaapecmjo-ecof; T?}? Trpo?ra ere0en> K. dvOpcoiTcov ywofjieva, and the first are alSeai/jLaSi aperyv, the latter &t,a (j>t,\a arwyyeveiav.iii. 5 : rot?Oeols v7roTera%oTos eavrbv (like some Socrates) K. TWViii.dv0p. TrpofcrjSofievov. 7. To this dual attitude theconstant collocation voepbv (Xoyitcbv) and TTO\LTIKOVnoted above has reference. iii. 9 :rrjv irpbs av6pci)7rovsolKelaxTiv K. rrjv rot? Qeols aKo\ou6lav. iii. 1 1 . At eachTOVTO $e Trapaevent say TOVTO fjuev Trapa Oeov iJKt . . .rov crvufyvXov K. avyyevovs. 13. Always rememberingin each action T^? dfju<f)OTepa)v TT^O? d\\r)\a orvvbeaewsOvre yap avOptoTTivov rt avev TT}? eVfc ra Oela avvavafapasev irpageis, ovr epTra^iv (here we have the closeassociation of the two complementary halves of man sduty). iv. 3. (On discontent, what is it aimed at ?)rrj TWV dvOp. Kaicia ; rot? eic rwv O\MV dirove^ofjievoi^ ;(where we notice substitution of natural causes, in fate,for the divine (and almost personal) providence hithertodiscussed). Nowhere has he stated his position soclearly and tersely as in v. 25 :Eya* vvv e%co 6 /-te@e\et, vvv G^eiv rj Koivrj K.<&vai<;, TTpdacra) o pe vvvirpda-aeiv OeXecf) e/jLrj (frvcri,?.Here the universalNature, which at this stage in his Meditations sup-

"MAN AND THE WORLD 155plants the gods, is the law of destiny, apportioning,severally, joy and sorrow to each :my peculiar natureis the social instinct of man, KOivwfaXrjs, KOIVCOVLKOS.(Though it is difficult in such interdependence andimplication to insulate any one side, yetit will benecessary to speak more fully upon this half-contrast,half-conciliation of the two Natures," the world s andours, because in this consisted the great crux of thewhole Stoic philosophy.)3. v. 27. Man sduty divided into passive and activeside of morality : dpecricofAevrjv VLCV -rot? aTrovepopevois,iroiovcrav $e ocra ftov\rai o Aal/jioov. . . e/cdarov vovstc.^0709. Here itmay not be altogether fanciful tonote in anticipation of Marcus final mysticism, thatthe personal within seems to compensate for the neuterand fatalistic without.} vi. 16. Eeverence for yourSidvoia makes you dpearov to yourself, K. rot? avQp.evdp/jiocrrov K. rot? 6eois crvfjbfaovov.vi. 30 : aiSovQeovs, orco^e dvQpdoTrovs. vi. 41. We can avoid blamingheaven and hating men (fie/ju^daOai, Qeols K. dv0pa)irov<?luafja-ai), by knowing that only ra efi rj^iv are goodand evil : then will there be no reason either to Bea>or ryfca\e<7at arrjvai, arrdaiv TroXe^iov Trpbs dvdp. (where,after an interval, we may note the recurrence oforthodox phrases). vii. 52 :evra/cTorepos eVl rot?GvpfiaivovGiv . . . ev/jLeveo-reposrdTT/OO?rwvTrapopd/jLara. 54: Trj Trapovcrrj av/ji^daeevapearelv K. rot? irapovcnv dvOpwTrov? Kara7rpo(7(f)epe(r0ai,.55 : Sid TWV {rvpftawoirrtov 001,, opposedto Sid TWV TrpcucTewv VTTO aov. vii. 66. He asksSocrates if he can be thus contented, dp/celo-Qai,TWSifcaios elvat, rd TT/SO? dvOptoTrovs, K. 6Vt09 rd Trpos Oeovs.viii. 2 3 :Updacrwri ; Ilpdacrco eir dv6p(t)Tro)v

779156 MARCUS AURELIUSdva<f)epa)v.. . .^vfjLJBaivGi TL IJLOI ;T0t>9 Oeovs dva(f)6pa)v K. rrjv TrdvTcov Trtjyrjv d<$>irdvrard ytvo/jueva crvfjifirjpveTai (where, it may be noted, wefind a mixture of the personal and placable providenceof the gods, identified, or at least set side by side, withthe scheme ofpredestinarian Fatalism).4. In viii. 2 7 he adds another relation to the body(for I feel compelled to adopt Coraes reading, crw^ariovfor OITIOV):Tpeis a^eo-eis rj /j,ev 777)09 TO crcopaTiov TOirepifceifjievov rj 8e 777)09 rrjv deiav alrlav d(f) 979 (rv/jL/SaiveiTrdcri Trdvra rjBe 7r/?09 TO^ crvfji{3iovvTa<$. viii. 34. Ashand or any other limb cut off from body, so is 6 ft?)fJirjT dv0pQ)7ra>v Tiva, yu,??Te TI TWV dvOpoorroisThis is true health, vyies ifyew TOmoralov. ix. 6. What suffices(dp/eel)forjudgment and so for perfect happiness and content :7? Trapovaa Trpd%i<$ KOIVMVIKT) K. f) irapovcra $LevapecrTLKT) 77^069 irdv TO Trapd Trjs eT09 Atria?ftcuvov. ix. 31. ^ATapa^ia jjuev irepl TWV aTro r?}9 e:T09AlTias crv/A/BawovTcov SiKaiOTr]^ Be ev rot9 Trapd Trjv e/c<TOV aiTiav evepyovjjLevow. (Here note in passing theclear emphasis on the freedom of the will ;man sagency is the single exception in the chain of fataland predetermined series. Stoicism, in some pointsthe very counterpart, is in others the very opposite, ofCalvinism.) x, 1. Marcus somewhat despondingly asksif his soul will ever be such as to live with gods andmen in fullest sympathy, 0eot9 re K. dvOpooTroiso>9tJTe neeaOai TL

""MAN AND THE WORLD 157\nr avTwv. x. 6. The happiness of thecitizen s life (evpoia), TrpoiovTos Si,d Trpdtfewv rot? TTO\I-TCU9 \V(TI,T6\(Jt)V K.07Tp O.V J] TToAt? CLTTOVefJir) TOVTdo-Tra&fjuevov (which, of course, applies both to thegreater and the lesser Commonwealth of Nature andof human society. x. 11. A man recognising nearapproach of death, devotes himself to two things, dvrjicevo\ov eavTov 8tfcat,oavvr) /mev els TO,up eavTov evepyov^evav Se rot? aXAot? o-vfjipaivovari rfjTWV o\cov 3>vaei . . .and again, Svo TOVTOIS dp/covjAevos. . .SifcaioTrpayeiv TOvvv Trpaaaro/jievovK. (frtXelv TO vvv aTrove^ofJbevov kavrw.xi. 13. To such a man, what evil can befall ? el Trotet?TO rf) (f)v<T6i(Tov olfcelov K.cj)i>(7ievicaipov.Se^?; TO vvv rfjrwv o\cov5. xi. 20. A very noticeable passage; for here, forthe first time, he assigns the first place to the passivevirtue of acquiescence and resignation. We are herefar on our road from the visible commonwealth inthe pilgrimage to the soul s true home Marcus;is,after all, a Quietist, though, like Mme. de Guyon, heshows wonderful aptitude for business, a wonderfulreadiness for cheerful endeavour. Hpo9 oo-iorrjra <ydpK. 0eocre/3eiav Karea/cevaaTai, ov% TJTTOV rj TT^OO? Sucaioo-vvijv.Kal yap ravra ev eibei eart TT}? ev/coivcovrjo-lasfjbd\\ov 8e Trpecrfivrepa TWV ^iKaiOTr^a^^aTwv. (Eendallexcellently (Our Inner :Self) is made for holinessand God-fearing no less than for justice. These twoare included in the thought of world-communion, nay,are prior even to the dues of justice.")xii. 1. Thus6crtoT7?9 and Sttcaiocrvvr) include all other virtues, thewhole Duty of Man : You can at once have all,compass the whole end of life, eav cnrevOvvys (TO Trdpovo9 oo-ioTrjTa K. &t,Kat,o(Tvv7jv the, former, iva

"""158 MARCUS AURELIUSTO aTrovefjuo/mevov, the latter, iva . . .Xeyrjs reK. Trpdaarj^ TO, Kara VO^JLOV K. KCLT^ a%Lav.xii. 24 : eVt fjuevwz> Trotet?. . . . eVl 8e TWZ>e^wOevcrvpftaivovrtov. 27. Nothing more worthyof Philosophy than to make oneself Si/caiov, o-axppova, #eofreTj-ofjievov (where craxfrpova adds the purely personalrelation to self, we noted once before ;which usuallyis, without doubt, included in the social, but which,even to Marcus, was beginning to have a paramountinterest). xii. 32 :MqSevfmeya (fravrd^ov rjTO &>77 ar) (frva-is ayet, iroielv, Trda^eiv Se eo? 97 fcoivrj(B) THE PROBLEM OF "CONFORMITY TO NATURE";VARYING DEFINITIONS OF $v(n<$ANALYSIS6. Difficult task of disguising difference of world and man ; isman to he identified or contrasted with Nature? whichnature is to guide us ?7. Post-Aristotelians preoccupied with their own peculiar nature;the world outside, unknowable and surrendered to Fortune.8. Result ; pure subjectivity ;man out of a place in a realm offixed law; no assured confidence in efficacy ofVirtue"9. Had itany place in a Divine yet transient world ? belief inpersonal deities revives (Boissier).10. The differentia of man something isolated and unique ;conflict to-day between scientific and Democratic (Christian)ideals.11. In a changeless and unprogressive universe, man has no otherduty than to be still ; promised or assumed unity and affinityin the two commonwealths6. Now this last quotationwill form an excellentlink to unite the series just completed with a new set,

""MAN AND THE WORLD 159very similar to the foregoing, occasionally (as in thiscase) cutting across them. And these point to anessential difference or disparateness in the nature ofman and the Nature of the Universe, my peculiarnature, and that universal power with which we aresometimes identified and absorbed, sometimes set inmore or less conscious contrast. This recalls one of themost interesting phases in the early history of theStoic School.The Phenician (?)founder of the School, adapting acertain Oriental gravity to the maxims of the Cynics,had ingenuously proposed the rule Follow Nature asthe end of life and the only certain guide to happiness.For to the Hellene there was no question as to theinterested end of all speculation or practice. An unselfish objective standard based on the needs of theState or of individuals, was to them inconceivable.Does not Marcus himself, most unselfish of men, laydown Travri yap av^vw^rf TO Ibiov ayaOov fyrovvri ;xi. 16 ? Now the acute Greek mind was not long indiscovering the worthlessness of such ambiguous advice.The Cynics, spoilt children, flattered and indulged anddeemed almost divine because they sank below theordinary average, had attempted to conceal or expelthe distinctively human in man. They reverted toprimitive barbarism, while boasting the citizenship ofthe world ;and it isby a supreme irony that later ageslooked on Socrates as a Cynic, who so stoutly professeshis indifference to natural phenomena, and his indebtedness to human society alone for allcared about. But, in the amplehe knew andleisure for reflexionafter Alexander s conquest, and the complete separationof active and theoretic life, the new disciple of the

""""160 MARCUS AURELIUSPhenician saw the need for clearer definition. WhichNature was to be our guide? the external or the inward ? the general or the peculiar and special?Clearlythe founder meant to inveigh broadly against theluxury and complexity of civilized life ;for there isnothing to show that they seriously contemplated whatwe should call a higher ethical standard. 1 It was arecall to simplicity, and (like most Hellenic systems) aprotest against the conventions and tyranny of City-life.7. But the keynote of all these post- AristotelianSchools is the sense of solitariness, of enforced inaction,of subjective and incommunicable perfection. The Stoicor Epicurean or Sceptic, whether Greek or Roman, isalways Athanasius contra Mundum shut ; up in thevery narrow limits of his own impressions, invalid foranyone but himself. Stoical dogmatism only threw aveil over this mournful doubt ;and even if it wassincerely believed, could only amount to this : thatNature, Source and Guide of all, was certain in herworkings, and inexorable, and out of range of humanunderstanding or sympathy. The frequency of theseassurances, addressed to oneself, that theUniversegood, and no harm befalls the wise," the rigidity ofthese formulae learnt off in the School, and held inreadiness in the mental arsenal for any emergency,seems to show how superficial was their professed contentment with the world as it1For example, there isnothing to prove that the School interfered withHellenic fyws. It may be to-day condemned as unnatural, but it wasnever included in any condemnation of ra-rrapd. and was<j>ij<riv,certainlypractised or allowed by Stoic leaders. For Aurelius did not owe toStoicism, but to Antoninus, his resolution "togive up boy -favourites."Epictetus (in common with most Cynic and Stoic dogmatists) believedthat naturally Kowai cuis.is

"""""""""MAN AND THE WORLD 161Gradually the Divine element or Nature retreatedinto the region of the unknowable ; though, like thegods of Epicurus, it was still pursued by the voice ofeulogy and thanksgiving. But man was really leftalone in a foreign element and in the middle of asociety which, though of kindred origin, was out ofharmony. And a new potentate was (illogically) admitted to share the monarchy of the world: Fortune,borrowed somehow from Aristotle s half-serious impeachment of the sublunary sphere and its uncertainties.At any rate, the actual Nature around the wise manwas the realm of a Chance, which appeared now as amere result of natural forces, now (in their theatricaldeclamation) as a fanciful and malevolent sprite. Itwas clear that this domain of fickleness could provideno safe criterion for human behaviour. He was thrownback upon his own resources and there alone could he;findhelp.8. Thus the dogmatismof the School becomesin practice pure sophistic subjectivity, and preparesthe way for the wonderful discovery of the Imperialage that God could be born in the believer s heart ;or was, unseen and unsuspected, already there. Butthe earliest correctors of the ambiguous maxim arestill sober and commonplace. Man s special naturewas to be logical and social." The workings of theother nature he could never understand, and so mustaccept with the best grace possible. Their encomiumof the unity of the world, the solidarity of humanbrotherhood, never disguised their conviction of alienation. They protested too much and we; may admire either their unswerving allegiance to erroneouslogic, or their pious resignation ; for others with greaterii

"What"1 62 MARCUS AURELIUSplausibility had from the same data proved the worldto be the devil s work. Let us examine of what kindwas this divine environment, in which the Sage felthimself so little at home. It was a complex system ofunalterable law, which had existed from all eternity, orat least from a far-off catastrophe of fire, aRagnarok,"in which even the gods were reabsorbed. The notionof progress, of advance, was therefore both impious andinconceivable. The moral life of man, on which theylaid so much stress, existed in this complex of automaticperfection a thing apart, strange and uncomfortable.There was no efficacy in virtue, no result at all, exceptthe serene composure in the good man s soul ;which onoccasion could be exchangedthe disillusioned Brutus : o>rX^/xoz/Be ae co?epyov ijcncovv.for the defiant hatred ofAperrj, \6yos apor9. For it is impossible to see what function virtuemoral effort can perform in such a world, divine andtherefore stationary, fire-born and therefore transitory.We may readily expect the truly earnest minds to turnfrom the frank materialism of the early School to amore spiritual conception, and to ally themselves withreligious faith. Epicurus is very pregnant and commendable in his well-known query:is the useof ridding ourselves of the fear of heaven if we are tobow to natural law 1 Better were our former masters ;for, tyrants though they were, they were at least propitiable,whereas physical fate is inexorable, blind,uniform." Marcus, as we have seen, continually waversbetween the impersonal Nature (17rwv o\cov c/wcrt?)andthe more comforting personal sense of gods in theuniverse, apportioning to each man his lot. It was

"MAN AND THE WORLD 163assuredly the urgent need in morals of some reinforcement, from tradition and popular sentiment, that led tothis new alliance (called Syncretism) between the exileddeities and the new mechanical theory of the universe.It was the personal finite reason protesting against thecold or immoral dictates of the Pure or SpeculativeIntelligence."The former can never be satisfied withgeneral laws, or with an assurance of its own nothingness. He will seek relief in the most unexpected andunpromising quarters? Boissier in his Roman Religionhas well described the revival of Faith in the firsttwo centuries after Christ. The utter lack of correspondence in Scientific Fatalism, between the effortand recompense, the labour and the success, inthe case of moral action, will surely drive averagemen to careless indifference or pleasure ;and noceaseless Buddhistic repetitions of formulae will savethe sensitive soul from despair. The outer Nature, then,had nothing in common with man s moral and socialinstinct, and provided no certainty for its exercise orusefulness.10. The "differentia" of man, his oltcelov epyov,the theoretic contemplation of the laws of being,his sense of sympathy with his kindred, was something utterly distinct and abhorrent from the restof natural things ;it was not in the same plane.This was never, indeed, divulged in so many wordsby the Stoics ; indeed, the fallacy of the Law ofNature, as prescribing morality, lasts well into our owndays ;but they were dimly and uneasily conscious ofthe gulf. It was Professor Huxley who clearly propounded in his Evolution and Ethics what had been longsuspected, that there was no affinity whatever between

""Maxim""""1 64 MARCUS AURELIUSthe two realms. 1Theonus probandirests with thoseone setwho, like Dr. Drummond, believe there is onlyof laws in the universe. There may be pleasant andfrequent analogies, or unlooked-for harmonies but these;should never obscure the intense initial contrast, onwhich depends our European fabric and our personalhope. Only such fantastic anarchists in theory asNietzsche,Gorki," Me rejowsky, can afford, orperhaps are bold enough, in innocent speculation tofollow logically on the lessons of Nature ;and show thatthe subservience of a once aristocratic world to democratic Christianity is one long mistake, and must berectified by a return to the primitive instinct of rapine,plunder, and the pride of strength and cruelty. Allthis, though happily only a wild theory of a few kindlyand gifted individuals, is quite in accordance withNature s advice to the nascent soul. The axioms ofscientificNaturalism have become wearisomely familiarto us in the past thirty years ;ence,"the struggle for exist"the weakest to the wall," the survival offittest," and (may we add ?)thethe Devil take the hindmost." No wonder that a compassionate democraticSocialism, built on the substructure of Christian ethics,feminine, self-forgetting,calls for an end of this ceaseless warfare and carnage, at least in the human family ;and others desire to include even the animals in thegeneral truce. The nineteenth century ends in a1 He must cordially have approved of one passage in our author, wherethe discontinuity and essential diversity of natural and moral are recognised with unusual force ;vi. 17 Kdrw : "Az>o> /ctf/cAy rlJov <popal crroixeluv !H 5 TTJS dperTJs KLvrjcris v ovdefuq, TOI/TWV dXXa 6ei6rp6v TL K. odtj} dvcreirivo-fjrifTrpo iovffa evodel. (R. : "Upwards, downwards, round and roundcourse the elements. But the motion of virtue is none of these ;of somediviner mould, it pursues the even tenor of courses unimagined.")

""""MAN AND THE WORLD 165Dualism. In spite of some laughter at thetight compartmentswaterof scientific knowledge and religiousfaith, this is the normal attitude of the educated mind ;not, indeed, in the Gnostic or Lactantian sense that thephysical world was created originally, or is now for atime entirely administered, by the evil principle but;rather in this conviction (.. . at first negative, andthen expanding into a very exuberance of postulates andcorollaries . . that our nature and differentia is.),essentially distinct from anything else in the world ;that our duty is to attack, control, and subordinatematerial forces ;bo contradict the blind or remorselessadvance of the Cosmic Process, and snatch from its jawsthe weaker and even unpromising members of the humanfamily. To justify this attitude, to encourage thisseemingly fruitless endeavour, they appeal, not to reason,but to a common consciousness, and to a moral instinctwhich they cannot expel, to a personal hope which theyfind it hard to explain. Secular Science and ChristianDemocracy are at issue on this point. The former aremore concerned for the freedom of truth and discovery,the creation of a more perfect race by selection andadaptation, than for the preservation or enlightenmentof the tiresome weaklings who crowd our overgrowncities. The twentieth century will see the fresh varietiesl1Read the whole of the Pessimistic conclusion of Book II., especiallythe words 6 d /Jios, TroXejuos Kal &vov tTridrj/uiia, for the true home andfatherland of man is the Cosmopolis, and the Sage will ever be a strangerin the haunts of men ; cf. xii. 1 :"Ec-?? tivdpuiros <5ios TOV yevvr](rdvTosK6<TyUoi>, K. wava-ri 6/os &v rfjs irarpidos. This is no sober advice Spartamnactus es, hanc exorna," in which the river of patriotism, confined innarrow banks, runs deep and strong: but a call to a worship of Nature,the Actual ;to Aurelius, a pure and holy cult ; but, from the same premisses, to others a eulogy of brute strength and natural appetite.

"""""""166 MARCUS AURELIUSof the age-long contest of logic and abstract speculation,with the forces and prejudices ofunregeneratehumannature; refusing, in a strong sense of personal value,to be made a tool for the furthering of the kingdom ofScience, the advance of the Millennium, or the triumphof the Over-man."11. What seems most to have impressed theGreeks in their criticism of the Universe was that youcould not know its purpose in the same way you couldunderstand the motive ofa friend or fellow-citizen, andthat you could not foresee or avoid the certaintyof itsoperations. This humiliating ignorance or impotenceis thinly concealed beneath hymns to the majesty ofGod, as Nature or as Fate ;for it is surely superfluousto remind the reader that the three terms are interchangeable. Acquiescence is therefore the sole virtue,face to face with the workings of unknowable lawand sequence ;and the constant rebuke of discontent(Svcrapearrjo-^) may be due, partly to a religious senseof impiety, partly to a more practical dislike of the follyof temper and grumbling at what cannot be helped. Itwas a counsel of utility as well as a counsel ofperfection."As for any anticipation of the Baconianregnum hominis," or modern scientific improvements,we look in vain. Clearly, Lucilius and Seneca, to nametwo instances, believed it was sacrilege either to explore practically the secrets of Nature or to adapt suchknowledge to human uses. Both struck across thatcurious religious feeling which identified God and theworld, and that sense of self-sufficingness in simplicitywhich was the starting-point of the Cynic and Stoicsystem. Seneca might, indeed, enjoy and use as awealthy nobleman, but he could not justify as a

"MAN AND THE WORLD 167philosopher, the multiplication of conveniences andcomforts. Therefore, in this changeless world, eternal(at least in relation to us), we hope for no advance, noeffort is of avail, and Quietism remains the sole rule ofconduct. We may add that we shall find the samedepressing consciousness of vanity, of the futility ofstriving and endeavour, when we come to social relations. As the Universe is in the last resort impenetrableby knowledge and prayer, so each of our kindred is inhis soul a windowless monad," inaccessible to ourinfluence. An independent disaggregated Atomism isthe result of this boasted unity and affinity ;and it isonlythe wholesome instinct of the Eoman and thearistocrat that keeps Marcus not only to the passivetolerance of men he cannot understand, but to active endeavour in a society which isincurable and unchanging.(C)INHEEENT DIVERSITY OF THE NATURE OF MANAND THE WORLDANALYSIS12. (Texts of diversity between man s nature and the world s.)13. Each man a law to himself ;he veers round to a completesubjectivity ; negative attitude to Nature and men ; positiveguidance only from within.14. "Follow own constitution"; careful "physiology" necessaryfor virtue.15. Stoic creed no real support for his nature (or instinctive) goodness ; only a mere appendage; he feels, but he cannotcommunicate or convince.16. Marcus errs in believing himself indebted to Stoicism; Scienceand System teach him nothing he did not know before.12. We may now examine the passages in whichman s special nature is contrasted with the Universe.

"Him""i68MARCUS AURELIUSii. 9 : TOVTCDV ael Se2 fjiejAvrjcrdai, rk y TWV o\wvK. Tt9 r) fjirj K. 7TW9 aVTT) 7T/309 ClCelviJV ^OV(TaK.TL /iepo9 oTTOLou rev 6\ov ovcra. iii. 1. He speaks of hiswords carrying conviction only to TO>trpb? rrjv $vaiv K.TO, Taurus epya rywrjaicos (p/ceico/Aevct) (well translated byEendall :only who is in harmony with Natureand her sincere familiar iii. 4. This class is termed").in the old and almost obsolete phraseology of the earlierSchool : TCOV 6/jLo\o<yov/j,eva)<; 777 3>iKrei, {SiovvTtov, iii. 9.Harbour in the Inner Self no thought (73-0X771/^9) whichis avaKo\ov6o<$ rfj 3>vcrei K. rfj rov \oyiicov %a)ov tcara-(TKevr) (this is the first technical occurrence of this word,which is used for man s physical and mental conformation about fifteen times, and always in similar contexts).iv. 25. The life of the good man apecrKo^evov fMev rofcK T&V f/ O\(0v aTTove/jLOfjuevois, apKov/JievovSe rfj IStairpd$i SifcaLa K. SiaOe&ei, evfjuevel. Here note thatMarcus gets no active or practical encouragement oradvice from the world s course ;he is negativeregard, merely motionless before that which befalls :"Beneath the bludgeonings of Chancehead isbloody but unbowed."Myin thisThis defiance he restates as pietistic resignation. Hispractical life, its positive content, he gets from an innervoice calling to works of mercy and fellow-feeling, towhich there is no clue outside.So 32: It is the "specialendowment or equipment,"thediversity of gift,"that is to be the guide,Troieiv TO Kara TTJV l&iav KaTaaricevrjv K. rovrov aTrplgexetrOai. This law of one s being, more cogent severallythan the outer Law, is called o Xo709 7779 Trapacrrcevrjs,iv. 5, where Kendall translates reason of its con-

""""""""MAN AND THE WORLD 169stitution," namely, that of an intelligent being. v. 3.Think not, trouble not for others : evOeiav Trepaive,aKO\ovQ&v Trj fyvcret, rfj IBla K. rf) Koivy pLa Se apfyo-Tepcov TOVTWV 77 0809. The way of both is one here;Marcus may conscientiously believe, but he cannotconvince the reader. v. 25. Let him look to his ownfault ;I can t be troubled ;it is his nature. I havewhat the universe s nature wishes (77 tcowr) $vac<;),andI do that which my own specialdonature wishes me to(77 6/^77 (frvats).13. vi. 43. Again,"the diversities of gifts,anddifferences of operation," correcting the old impossibleideal of a purely typical excellence, in a favouredaristocracy and; seeing the value of the co-operation ofthings and faculties essentially diverse, and even antagonistic. Still, we are veering round to a completesubjectivity, which cuts the ground from any universalmoral judgment, and leaves each man free and uncriticizedto go his way. Does Sun demand toperform the part of the Rain ? Again, each singlestar are not all different, yet all co-operating to thesame end ?(ov^l Sidtyopa fjuev avvepya Be TT^O? ravrov;).vi. 44 :^vfjLfyepei 8 etcetera) TO Kara rrjv eavrov /cara-(rtcevrjv K. tfrvcnv (and my constitution, as I have learnedin the Schools, is both rational and social). vii. 58 :Kara TOV \6yov rfjs 0-779 <ucrea)9 ftiovv ae ovftelsirapa TOV <&vcray<;\6<yov -7779 /cowfjs ov8ev GQIvii. 20. The positive guide always his own nature77 /caraa-Kevij TOV avOpooirov. vii. 55. Look not onothers with their Inner Self, but look straight in fronteVt TL (76 77 ^U(7fc9 0^77766, T)T TOV 0\OV BiO, TWV (TVfjLftaivovTwvcroc K. 77 <rr)8ta T&V TrpaKTeow VTTO GOV. Noticethe immediate subdivision of the ambiguous term into:

""""170 MARCUS AURELIUSits parts, which are more or less incompatible, notparimateria;and note also that the outer Naturegives no positive guidance.viii. 12.inWhen you risesluggishly in the morning" (a special failing of theEmperor, as it would seem), remember that on KaraTTJV KaTaaKevrjv o~ov ecrTt, K. Kara rrjv av0p(t)Tn,Kr)v $vawTO Trpd^e^ rcoivtoviicas aTroSiSovai,, whereas the facultyof sleep is nodifferentia," but is common to man withthe unreasoning animals : o Be Kara (frvaivercdo-ra) rovrooiKeiorepov K. Trpoo-ffrveo-repov Kal or) /cal Trpoo-rjvearepov.For Marcus is struck by the laborious failure of the lifeof pleasure and self-indulgence, and, in his perfectlyfrank search for personal satisfaction, finds in socialaction alone his peculiar duty, and therefore (so ran thesyllogism of Teleology) his abiding contentment.14: For (viii. 26) v<ppo<rvvij dvOpwrrov rroielvra tSta avOpooTrov."ISiov &e dvOpcoTrov, evvoia Trpbs TO6/j,6(f)V\ov . . . eTCi6eu>p r}(Ji<$ T?)? T&V o\cov <&vcrea)S K.T&V fear avrrjv yivopevav. Here is man s function, indouble role of critic and appraiser of Nature, and agentin the smaller world this ; corresponds with the definition \o<yifcbv,TToXirtKov. viii. 45. Whatever befallsrefcej TOV ejjibv dai/jLovai\ea>v . . . el e%oi,K. evepjoir)Kara rb effi rrj IBia KaraaKevf). viii. 52. Knowledgeof self and of world (two quite different studies) indispensable for correct moral action (O pev : //.?)elScos o TI(earl Kooy-tcx?, OVK olbev OTTOV eariv. O 8e yu-r/el8a)<sTT/^O?e6 TI rre(f)VKv OVK olSev oVrt? e. ov$e ri e.Koa/juo^. O oeev TL rovrwv arroXiTTODv ov&e TT^OO?6 TI rre<f)VKv elrroi.It may be questioned whether Marcus found that thewider knowledge (the (f)vcno\oyia of the later books)really threw much light on man s social duty. Sciencehas always exerted a benumbing influence on the eager-

"""""""""""MAN AND THE WORLD 171ness of common life ;and it must be remembered thatthe so-called Stoictheologyisbut a department ofnatural investigation. iv. 29 :TTOITJCTOV o vvv f) AvertsaTratrei, a formula which recalls the old inexactness ofthe canon, Follow Nature," and gets over the difficultyof reconciling the two duties by confusing them, atrick common to all Pantheistic systems. ix. 42. Manfulfils the purpose of his nature, lives agreeably to hisconstitution in moral agency among his fellows, andtherefore, by a certain (optimistic) law, gains fullestsatisfaction :(limbs of body) Kara TTJV ISiav Karao-Kevrjvevepyovvra aTre^et, TO 8iov (where Eendall Find their\ :reward in realising the law of their being OVTCO").K. 6 dvOpcoTTos evepyeriKos Tre^i/^w?, when he does akindly action, TreTroirjKe TT^OO? o KareaKevao-rai, K. e^et TOeavrov.15. It is, of course, far from our purpose to doubtthe sincerity of the Emperor s experience. Had hebeen convinced of the fortuitous atomism of the worldprocess,he would still have found his highest pleasure(for he never shrinks from hedonistic terms) in showingmercy and pity and we should admire him no less.;What we want to point out is that his abstract andlogical Monism gives no better support, explanation,encouragement, for the life which (by a somewhatfoolish anomaly)is called self-denying (for e^et TOeaurou). This civic virtue nourishes independent of hisphilosophic creed, because he is Antoninus and aKoman," and still more because he ispermeated withreligious faith in a Providence which Stoicism properdid its best to expel." x. 33. That it was ultimatelyno School maxims," but his empiric conviction, whichled him to the social life, is clear again (as to r

""""""172 MARCUS AURELIUS4f77 rpv(f)tj) ; so it should come natural to you TO eVl T?}?. . .VTTOTriTTTovarjs vKrjs iroielv ra oltcela rfj rov avOpanrovfcara(7K6vfj airokavcrw yap Bel vTrohafjuftdveiv irav oefecrrt Kara rrjv ISiav $VGIV evepyeiv. Such action is tohim love, joy, peace his; subjective delight (incommunicable to others) sets the stamp of Nature s approvalon his choice. It is only by accident or carelessnessthat he acts otherwise. So the ultimate test is thissubjective feeling ;and everyone else must be left tofollow his own particular bent. For - Marcus, thoughconvinced himself of the superiority of the social life,of tolerance and self-denial and concession, cannot convince others, and does not attemptto. It may hereperhaps be remarked that in a sense all systems, evenof the austerest deontology, are in the last resorthedonistic;for the only reason of acceptance isapprobation, and approbation of the good is the highestform of pleasure. On this final hedonistic standardthere is a very beautiful and acute passage in Seneca,Ep. Ixxvi. : "Pro patria moriaris . . . salutem omniumcivium tua redimas . . . non tantum patienter sedlibenter. Si hoc facturus es, nullum aliud bonum est :omnia relinquis ut hoc habeas (went and sold all thathe had ;for here is the pearl of great price ). Vide,quanta vis honesti sit ? Pro RepuUicd morieris . . .interdum ex re pulcerrima magnum gaudium etiamtempore brew ac exiguo capitur et ; quamvis fructusoperis peracti nullus ad defunctum exemptumque rebushumanis pertineat, ipsa tamen contemplatio futuri operisjuvat : et vir fortis et Justus quum mortis suse pretiaante se posuit, libertatem patriot, salutem omnium proquibus dependit animam, in summa voluptate est etpericulo suo fruitur." x. 36. Man s function is now, by

""MAN AND THE WORLD 173oft repetition, beyond all controversy ;TO HSiovSttNTwfen/.) xi. 5. The whole position isput very clearly:Tt9 (70V TJrex^ ; ayaQov elvai. Tovro Se TTW? /caXco?ylverai, e/cTI Oewprj/jidrcov, rwv fiev Trepl rr/s rov 6\ov<ucreft>9 TMV Se irepl r?}? t Sta? rov dvOpcoTrov KaraaKevr)<$ ;It never seems to occur to him that the lessons of thetwo seem sometimes to come into conflict ;that the lifeof devotion to an ideal, realized not in oneself but inothers, is an absolute defiance flungin the face ofNatural Law and the Cosmic Process, and not a maximderived from scientific study. xii. 23. In provingDeath no Bane,"rov tcaipovK. rov opov oiBcoatv rj (frvcrisTTore fjiV KOI r) Icio, orav ev yijpa, irdvrws Se rjr&v f/ O\wv.(K. Nature sets ( the :right time and limit ;sometimes the individual nature with its bidding of old age,but in any case Nature at large, who by constantchanges of the parts keeps the whole Universe ever freshand vigorous.") While, to conclude, we have in thecitation already given above, xii. 32, a good and finaldistinction between the passivity (quietism) of the firstrule, the activity of the second,(rj a-rj<f>vo-i,<;. . .Timely, irdax 611 &e . . . r) KOivr) $ucrt? (frepei.)16. The sum of the whole matter seems to bethis : Marcus finds in himself an eager and uncontrollable impulse, born of his temperament, earlytraining, and high station, towards charitable and socialendeavour (of a somewhat restricted kind, and neitherenthusiastic nor self -forgetting). He suffers much if he,in this daily self-examination, discover opportunities forthis exercise overlooked. This sense of failure in theonly sphere of his free agency is the sole thing capableof causing him pain. All outward circumstance, eventhe success of his kindly efforts, is quite immaterial.

"No""174 MARCUS AURELIUSone can change his character," says CardinalNewman and Marcus would have been;unselfish, in thesame curious desponding way, among savages, and in faceof the certain dissolution of souls in an accidental world.But his character is a beautiful and divine gift,andshines and burns like the good deed in a naughty world,irrespective of any fuel derived from Stoic tenets. Nay,rather these latter are incapable of obscuring the innatekindliness, the religious unction, of the noblest of EomanEmperors. His devotion gets no confirmation from anunprejudiced survey of the world ;nor can he makeothers think like him, that the Beauty of Holiness isthe aim of the rational creature.

"""CHAPTER IIIABSOLUTESUBJECTIVITY(A)COMPLETE ISOLATION OF THE INDIVIDUAL FROMTHINGS AND FROM HIS FELLOW-MEN1. (1) Personality, aANALYSIS"windowless monad," impenetrable (laterto be contrasted with his psychic solidarity}; (2) Thingsabsolutely still and lifeless.2. Duty to others = negative tolerance; mind and motive of othermen beyond reach and understanding.3. Others cannot help their acts, and it is vain to be indignant oreager to reform.4. There must be such people in a world of all sorts ; why thenblame or despise? (no Standard or Value left except(Hegelian) fact of existence}.1. AFTER the emphasis on the peculiar propriety(ffiiov) of man s character, duty, and nature, which hasemerged in our last series of passages, we must advancestill further towards the isolation of the personality, notmerely from the rest of creatures, but also from itsespecial kindred. Forget also thine own people andthy father s And house." this doctrine of the impenetrable solitude of each Soul is all the more astoundingbecause it is combined with a genuine belief in thesolidarity of all rational beings, and with many phrases175

"""1 76 MARCUS AURELIUSof the most uncompromising Monopsychism. We maybe thankful that Marcus makes no attempt to be consistent or symmetrical ; weare content to find in thisvery confusion of his thought, assurance of his perfectsincerity. We must put side by side (1) those sectionswhere he pronounces the Soul (the real or Inner Self")of other men to be inaccessible to his influence, or,strictly, even to his sympathy. (We shall in the nextchapter note those passages in which he theorizes onthe ultimate unity and identity of all Soul. In theone case, the distinction, the separateness, is final;inthe second, it has no existence. In the one, personalityis the single irrefragable fact of experience ;in theother, it is a pure illusion. Which of these dogmas isthe real belief of Marcus, I know not ;I incline tothink he felt his solitariness too keenly to give morethanlip serviceto the hypothesis of a Single Soul orintelligence common to all men.) We shall add (2)those very striking passages in which he shows theabsolute stillness of things, the absurdity of the beliefthat they have life and movement in themselves, oreven swayor control our consciousness.2. On a closer survey, the social dutyis attenuatedinto a negative tolerance of other men a ; duty which israther to oneself than to others, of never feeling annoyance, anger, indignation at their faults. What they sayabout one is indifferent, and the wise man should payno attention to report or fame. Sometimes the reasonis the general Stoic belief that happiness cannot dependon anything external to consciousness (eV rat? aXXat?tyw%ais Tideo-Oai, rr)v ev^oipiav, ii. 6) ; sometimes, wheneven Marcus is unable to conceal his contempt, becausewe realize how worthless is the judgment or the gossip

""""ABSOLUTE SUBJECTIVITY 177of such men. Other men s wrongdoing, pleasure, ingratitude, and the like are due to ignorance of thecardinal axioms. iii. 11 :crvyyevovs dyvoovvros. . ./jLevToi, o TL avTG> /card cfrvcrtvecmv : for of nothing isMarcus more certain than of the Platonic dictum, Allvice is ignorance (ii. 2, iv. 3, vii. 62, 63, xi. 18). Buthis fault has nothing to do with the Sage, dpaprdvei,(T9 ; eavTo) d/jLaprdvei,. iv. 26 : O a^apTdvcov eatmo6 d$i/ca)i> eavTov dBi/cei. iv. 38. We aredfjuaprdvei,invited to look at the Inner Self of other men, rdCLVT&V Sm/3Xe7re, while in the next section werjye/jLovi/cdare warned not to suppose our evil or our good dwellsthere ; ev dXXorptw r^ye^oviKO) icaicov <rov ov% v^ia-rarai.v. 3. etceivoi, fiev ydp iSiov r^fjiepoviKov K.e^ovcri,18 10,oppf) ^P&VTCU, a ait /JUT) 7repi/3\e7rov. Here the mind, themotive of others, is beyond our reach and understanding ;the verb here is quite consistent with iv. 38, for it implies anxious interest;there, a piercing but momentaryscrutiny. v. 2 5 : aXXo9 djjLaprdi ei TI et9 e //.e ;iQeaiv IBlav evpyeiav (so that even el r)OVK opyicneov TW pXaTrrovrt,, v. 22). Heuses a somewhat offensive analogy to show how fruitless itis to quarrel with or seek to alter another person s natureor function. v. 28 rcS :ypdawvi, fjLtjri, opyi^rj ; /JLTJTI, repob(7To/A&) y TI CTOL Troitjo ei, ; TOLOVTOV crro^a e^ei.vi. 22.Concentration of self and the even tenor (evpoia) ofa consistent life makes it difficult to reprove and correctothers :EyoD TO e/AavTov Ka6r)/cov TTOIW raXXa fie oc7rpL<T7ra rjTOi yap a^v^a 77 d\oya rj r rre r jr\av r]^eva(iii. 11) K. TTJV ooov dyvoovvTa.3. vi. 27 : n<w9GD/Jibv e. ^eTrirpeTrewrot9 dvd.opfjudv eVt TO, (fxtivo/jieva avTols oltcela K.a-v^epovra ;and this you don t do, OTCLV dyavaKrfis OTI apap-12

""""""""i;8 MARCUS AURELIUSolicela K.TCLVOVGL. $epovTai yap TTCLVTWS &>?eVtavrols. But it isn t so."o-v/uL(f>epovTaVerywell, teach them that, and show them the waywithout vexation(ovtcovv BiBacrKe K. Bettcvve fjirj dya-VCLKT&V). Similarly v. 28: Beigov, vTro^vqcrov ! El yapeiraiei, OepaTrevo-eis K. ov XP ^a yii.bpyfy- 55: My:etfacrrw TO7repi/3\e7Tov dXXorpia fiyefioviKa . . . TTpaKreov6(7)9 777 tcaTaafcevfj. vii. 71. Complete inwardness orYou can escape yourof this moral aim"subjectivityown evil ;other men syou cannot (ye\oiov e. rrjvKdKiav \LT] <f>euyiv6 Kal Swarov e. rrjv 8efavyew oirep abvvaTov).viii. 4. You will neverreform them ! ov&ev r^rrov ra avra Troiijaovo i,KOLV <rvSiappayfjs. viii. 14. If he has such principles (Soypara),there isnothing surprising if he behaves so : K. /jLefimjcro/jLaion avaytcd^erai OVTCO Troielv. E. : "I shall not besurprised or shocked at his doing such and such things ;I shall remember that he cannot do otherwise." (Wemay perhaps wonder, even if Marcus will not, at thisuse of compulsion for his entire ; systemis founded onthe absolute freedom at any given moment of the soulto choose the right.) The relativity of the standard isvery clearly put in viii. 43: Ev<f>pau>ia\\ov a\\o e//*Be lav 1/7*69 e^o)TO rjye/jLoviKov. It is natural, then,that he should avow that only certain natures orcharacters can see the cogency of his arguments ; iii. 3 :TroXXa rouivTa ov Travri TriOava nova) Be ru>77/309 TTJV$vcriv . . .yvrjo-icos tpicU9fAiHp.The only legitimateand (not very effective) instrument of moral reform ispersuasion ; but one asks, What if the sinner refuses torecognize the postulates 1 El fj.ev Bvvdcrai fjueTaBiBaa/ce"el Be fjirj, fj,efji,vr)croon 77^09 TOUTO rj ev/j,eveta GQI BeBorai,ix. 11 ; similarly, ix. 42 : "OX*$ Be e%eo-n aoi pera-

""When"ABSOLUTE SUBJECTIVITY 179&t.8dcr/ceiv TOV 7re7r\avr)fj,evov. ix. 20 : To d\\ov d/jidpeicelSei /cara\L7reiv. In viii. 61 : Elaievai et? TOet9 TO eavTov rjy. ,eKacrrov Trape^etvSe K.erepw Travri eldievai4. We have only an apparent inconsistencybetween the earlier contrast &id/3\67re and 7repi,l3\e7rovLet others see your principles, your motives and;do you take their measure, and see if their judgment should carry weight."The whole of thelast paragraph in the Ninth Book is interesting:you stumble on the shamelessness of another,straightway ask yourself : AVVCLVTCLL ovv ev TO> KOO-/LNWdvaicr-xyvTOi /JLTJ elvai; ov SvvavTcu offences must needs("be"). Mr] ovv dTrairet, TO dSvvarov, et? yapK. OTO? e.rwv dvaio"xyvTa)V,01)9 dvdy/cr) ev TOJKocrfiq) elvai.Apply the same canon in case of the villain, the traitor,and every kind of sinner (TO yevos TWV roiovrcop, dBvvarovTL Sal /catcov rj %evov yeyovev el 66. fJ^rj vTrdp^eiv. , . .aTratSeuTO? rd TOV dTrai&evrov Trpdacrei ;) ;we mustgently protest against the assumption in the last sentence. If all these different characters are needed forthe furtherance of the World sPurpose (whatever thatmay be), so that, as Burke says, we have that actionand counter-action which in the natural and in thepolitical world, from the reciprocal struggle of discordantpowers, draws out the harmony of the Universe," why,we ask, does Marcus apply a bad and contemptuousname to any one of these diverse, yet (in their properplace) meritorious, units 1 It is not as if a finalstandard had been agreed upon. After all, there couldbe no standard of merit except the fact of existence.Yet while Marcus here outstrips the proper limits ofindulgent and indifferent critic, we may clearlysee his

"""i8oMARCUS AURELIUSprofoundconviction of theuselessness of reform, of anyanticipation of a better state of mankind. A God /cannot develop ;the universe was divine or indeedGod therefore it were; impious to connect change forthe better either with the greater Commonwealth ofNatural Law, or the lesser state of reasonable beings,which, in some unaccountable way, boasted a still closeraffinity with the Source of Life. Therefore in a Cityit is no use to extirpate abuses ; therefore, the wholemirage of life is meaningless, and time, instead of making for some far-off divine event," is mere monotonoussuccession of the same tedious commonplace. In x. 4we have the better side of this tolerant Indifferentism,which is surely a dangerous virtue in a supreme ruler ;what would our Liberals say to the dethronement oftheir noble Discontent ? El ^ev <r<f)d\\6Tatbeucvvvai. El Se aevfj,evo)s fcal TO irapopa>/jivovaeavTov alriao-OaL rj /jbijSeaeavrbv. What ifby somecurious chance he is here speaking of the youngCommodus and some boyish escapade, in which, nevertheless (as in the repulsive episode in W. Pater sMariusabout the broiled kitten), plainly emergedthe ill-conditioned brutality or the madness of precociousCsesarism ? It is noticeable that the Emperor neverspeaks of the remedial power of punishment. It isstrange to meditate upon the possible consequences tothe world of a little well-placed severity in the earlytreatment of his son. 11 How deeply pathetic is his double repetition of the old tragic line,where he comforts himself for Heaven s desertion : el 5 rjfj.eX^d-rjv K 6euvK. TCU ^/*w x el ^070? Kal TOVTO (vii. 41, xi. 6) !

""""ABSOLUTE SUBJECTIVITY 181(B)MORAL EFFORT EXPIRES IN TOLERANCE OF EVILANALYSIS5. Excuse for sinners carried to verge of denying moral obligation(no spiritual criterion); Absolutism in every age.6. Denies reality to Sin as to Evil ; only ignorance (amiabilitya fault in a ruler).7. Cause of failure ;Aurelius has all the feminine virtues; a"slave-morality"; bluff and sturdy soldiers reconstructfabric of Empire.5. x. 30. Excuse for the sinner: Piaterac ri yapTroirjcrei,; which Eendall well translates : He cannotSvvacrat,a<f>e\ehelp himself what else can he do ? el;avrov TO ftia^o/jievov (we have already seen the slightair of mystery attachingto thiscompulsion ").Is itforce of habit, or ignorance, or result of bad principles?(Soypara). If we follow another series of passages inwhich man s inalienable freedom isbrought out, weand can be removedshall decide that it is imaginary, at pleasure by the Will. But here it appears to bea real hindrance. In some later Platonist sand somecoeval Christians, it would certainly imply daemonicpossession, the enslavement of the Will (as in Eom. vii.and the evoiKovcra a^apria). The real and patheticremoteness of Marcus, from his own time, the interval or bridgeless gulf between the Emperor and hiscourtiers and family, may be discovered in the sadmaxim, xi. 8 : O^oOa/jLveiv /mev, JJLT) o/jLoSoy/jLareiv Se,admirably paraphrased or modernized by Kendall sSo, then, one at core if not in creed." So, ix. 3,he finds consolation for death in the thought, on OVKair avOptoirwv o/jLoSoy^aTOvvrayv<TOLr) airaXXayrj earai.TOVTO yap ^ovov. . . avdel\Kev av K. /carel^evev TO>

">,e""""1 82 MARCUS AURELIUS&> Sdvareavv ecetroNvv 8opa<$rot?0(70?raoavra/COTTO?oyfjiara r 7repi r rreiroL f r)-eV rfj Sia^covla 1-775ar elTrelv Oarrov e X#ot?,Kara-/JUT]TTOV K. at>ro5eTTiXdOco/jLai GfjuavTov" xi. 13 :(frpovrjcrei, IJLOV TY? ; otyerai. (That is his businessentirely ; I, too, will look to myself, that I be notfound doing or saying aught deserving of contempt.)MicrTJcrei, ; cn/rerat.*A\\* eja) evpevr]? K. tXew? iravrl(and ready to pointout his fault or omission TOTrapopco/Jievov). Fifth of the maxims laid down inxi. 18 comes ov$e el a^apjdvovcn /taretX^^a? TroXXayap Kal /car oltcovofjuiav yiverai,. Kal oXw? TroXXa SetTrporepov paQelv r iva Tt? Trepl dXkorpias Trpafew? /cara-\rj7n irc&s n cnro^v^rai. Eendall: "You cannot even besure ifthey are doing wrong for; many actions dependupon some secondary end. 1In short, one has muchto learn before one can make sure and certain aboutanother s action." This tendency is leading slowly butsurely to an absolute denial of the moral standard ;to the peculiar temper of the philosophers of theAbsolute :who, determined to reach Unity somewhere,abandon the ethical standpoint as dualistic and imperfect, and perhaps feel enamoured of a speedier route1 I am inclined myself to connect this difficult word with the familiarPatristic usage :capacity,adaptation of means to ends, condescension to humanscheme of salvation accompanied by many seemingly incongruous details in the pursuit of the grand aim, all the somewhat mistycomplex of ideas bound up in the idea of the Divine Stewardship, which(I need scarcely remark), in the Latinized "Dispensation," disappearsentirely.2e.g. what would some people make of this, ii. 8 : Tot>s rots idlasij/vxfy KLvrjfj,aai /U,TJ TrapaKoXovOovvras avdyKy Neither/ca/co5cu/iomj> ?substantive suggests any spiritual criterion ;and while the maximmight suit the purity of Quakers "Inner Light," it might also condonethe excesses of the Kingdom of Munster.2

"""""""""ABSOLUTE SUBJECTIVITY 183to knowledge than by a process retaining thenessof subject and object.other6. St. Paul s constant advice, Judge not anotherman s servant," and his insistence on the subjectivityof Ideals, yet never disturbs the grand and broadoutlines of the moral fabric. But Aurelius warpinghis better Eoman judgment in a school where alloffences areequal,"andall men either wise orfools, saved or lost,"where everything is bluntly blackand white, and nothing shades off in an indistinctborderland goes far towards denying realityto sinand evil altogether. At most, it is but subjective folly,result of poor principles ; try and persuade the sinner,gently remonstrating, and he may mend his ways.In the Ninth, xi. 18 :irpaa)^ Trapaivfjs K. /JbeTaSiSda-KTjs,in words which strongly recall the aged and indulgentEli.("Seizethe moment when he is bent on mischief;to convert him to a better frame of mind :try quietlyNot so, my son, we are made for other ends ; you cannothurt me, you hurt yourself, my son" E.). Mrf, TGKVOVa\\o TretyvKafAev. IJ/yo) /J,evov fjbr) /3A,a/3w, crv BeagainstTewov. 1 It is an unanswerable argumentPlato sthat the essentialPhilosopher-King,"qualities of a Sage are precisely those which are likelyto be mischievous in a Euler. Let us, as leaders ofmen, have no cynics, but rather eager and enthusiasticstrivers for what they believe to be right. Lewis xvi.,1In spite of this loving formula, we find Marcus, v. 20, arranging(in a certain aspect) even fellow-men among In one sensea5id<j>opa.fytuV e1 . oiKeioTCLTov tivdpu-rros, inasmuch as we must do good to them andbear patiently with them ;/ca0 &<rov 5 eV/<rravrat rtves eis ra ok eta tyya,ev ri T&V adiafiopuv /not yiveraL 6 avOponros oi)% ^craov T) r/Xtos rj dveju-os 1)dypiov (= (l in so far as individuals obstruct my proper action, man fallsinto the category of things indifferent." R.).

"""1 84 MARCUS AURELIUSif not an incapable, was a philosopher-king ; yet thesuccess of that unaccountable movement, the FrenchRevolution, was due to his (unconscious) followingMarcus rules. A point of view so lofty,an outlook sosublime, of that man and his petty passions and strugglesare but the turmoil of an ant-heap, a judgment sotolerant that it finds excuse for every misdoer, theseare not proper qualifications in a statesman or asovereign. There is surely nothing gained by belittlinghuman life, by depreciating human concerns. Nor doesthe ascetic advance morality by arousing contempt forthe body. The politician or the king who fails is notthe one who takes a side and boldly embraces even hisproved mistakes but the one who loses faith in;himself,has no convictions, and sees everything in one dim anddreary atmosphere of grey.7. At the end of the section he reaches a climax,and decks his pathetic maxim with a quite Platonicpoetical trope Tenth, and :lastly a gift, so please you,from Apollo, leader of the choir" (el 8e povKei, KOITrapd rov Movarjyerov Swpov \djBe, on TO firjdfuLapTavew {lavi/cov dSvvdrov <ydp e^terat). It ismadness to ask that evil should cease, or that the badshould stop sinning. xii. 12: TO ef^9 rfj $vo-ei (fornatural consequences), //^re #eot? ovbev /jbe/jwrreov yapeKovres rj aKovres dfiaprdvovert,fir^re dvOpatTroi,?ovftevyap ov^l aKovres. e/fl(TT ovoevl AfijbefjLTTTeov.moreabsolute eVo^ or suspension of judgment for wanteither of materials to form a criterion or from lack ofany standard whatsoever, youwill not find in Sextus!Empiricusxii. 16: 6 firj0e\a)v rov (f>av\ov d^aprdveiv,ofjioiosTO,T&>/3p<j)/jbrj6e\ovTi rrjv (TV/cfjv OTTOV . . .ir) K\avOiJLvpi%ea6ai, K. TOV fanrov<f>epewK.

"""""av""ABSOLUTE SUBJECTIVITY 185K. ocra d\\a avayicala. Ti yap TraOr), rrjv e$;iv e^covTOiavrrjv; el ovv 70/9709 el Tavrrjv Bepairevaov. ("Whatelse can result, his heart being what it is ? If itaggrieves you, amend it ! The")sins or shortcomings of the particular are necessary (avwficala)and indispensable ; partial evil is universal good."viii. 50. An angry critic, stung by a bee, or annoyedthat a fig is unripe, or a thorn in the track, asks crossly:Tl Se Kal eyiveTO Tavra ev ra>Ko0yx.&> ; you will belaughed at by any student of Nature,&>9(answers Aurelius)K. viro re/cravo? K.... ifyou were to be aggrieved that in his workshop,ev rat epyaaTrjpLO) fe<j/uara K. TreptTfji^/jLara rcov Kara-<TKvaoiJ,eva)v 6 pa?. Nature, divine though she be,*must have her failures, her misfits, her refuse, andshe has no place outside herself to put the rubbish.All is Kismet and with God there are no dis;tinctions, for all is perfect.We have not the slightest wish in the foregoing tounderrate the personal character of Marcus. No lightwords or settled treatise could destroy the beauty ofthe man, devoted to the undeviating pursuit of theright, or undermine his fair fame. But he is to usso worthy of respect and homage, not because, but inspite, of his tenets. The Stoic school nearly spoilt thenoblest of the Romans, and certainly helped to saddenhis life with a sense of failure and inefficacy. He hasall the Christian virtues (except joy), which Nietzschestigmatizes asfeminine." His is distinctively aslavemorality."He is weak as a ruler because he sees toofar as a philosopher. In his eyes nothingis worth ourattention, and the faults of others concern themselves.A little more righteous indignation, a harder line

""""""1 86 MARCUS AURELIUSbetween essentialsandindifferentsin behaviour, andthe world might perhaps have been spared the sanguinaryturbulence of the next hundred years. Truly, whenDiocletian rebuilt the shattered palace of civilization,the crumbled edifice of the Eoman State, he forgotevery maxim of Marcus. He was not for that any theless the Carnillus, the second founder of the Empire.(Cf) SOUL, WITHOUT EEAL CONTACT WITH TH1NGS-IN-THEMSELVES, CAN ASSIMILATE AND TRANSMUTEINTO MATERIAL FOR ITS OWN NURTUREANALYSIS8. Absolute independence towards outward things ; still they maybe transmuted from dross into gold by Soul as in a crucible ;all can become material for Virtue.9. World of phenomenon has no substantive existence ; a glitteringmirage (Porch- Materialism ends in pure Idealism) ; attitudeas of Magician to Spirits.10. None of them really come to us; it is we who "call them in" ;source of impressions unknowable.11. Man in Solitude; spite of a theoretical Citizenship in twoworlds; prevalent "inwardness" or mysticism of the ageleaves clear trace on Marcus.8. The Sage, in spite of the highest politicalprerogative, cannot issue forth from the magic circle ofhis own principles, I had almost said impressions ;but he has the complete mastery and control of these ;he can transform the sense-message at will for Trdvra;77-0X77^9 and his vTroXytyis is free and final. Nowwhat is his relation to the events, to thethingsthe world ? A similar and absolute independence.Each man is accountable to no earthly power saveof

"""""hisownABSOLUTE SUBJECTIVITY 187InnerSelf;and has found the secret oftransmuting the base metal of outward occasion intothe alchemist s gold of noble choice. Everything ismaterial, v\r), for virtuous action. The finest andclearest passage on this subject is at the opening of theFourth Book : To evbov icvpievov orav Kara fyvaiv e%r),ovro)<s earrj/ce irpbs ra av^aLvovra ware del vrpo? TOSvvarov K. "SiSofjuevov ^eraridecrOai paSiW. (E,.When:the Sovereign Power within is true to nature, itsattitude towards outward circumstance is that of readyadjustment to whatever is possible and offered foracceptance.")(T\r)v yap aTroreray^evrfv ov^e^iav <f)i\el( = sets its affections on no determinate material) aXVopfjLa Trpbs ra = "rjjov/jieva //,$ uTrefatpecrea)? ( keepseach impulse and preference conditional and subject toreservation To Se").avreiaa^ofjievov vXrjv eavro)wcnrep TO Trvp orav eTTiKparfjTWV eTr(vfi &v av fjiiKpos rt9 Xi^T09 ea/3ecr0r)). ("Obstaclesencountered it converts into material for itself, just asfire layshold of accumulationsover all the fuel flung upon it],choked a feeblerlight[? gets the masterywhich would have1 To Se \afjufirpov nrvp rd^to-Tae^wKeiwaey eavra) ra7TL(j)opovfJLevaK. KaTijvdXcoo-ev K.eVt et; ai>TMv fjiel^ov ijpQrj.For a blaze of fire at once("assimilates all that isheaped on it, consumes it, andderives new vigour from the process." Kendall, iv. 1.)So v. 20. TlepiTpeirei yap K. fiedia-Trjai TTCLV TO rrjsevepyeias Ka)\v/jLa r) Aidvoia et? TO Trporjyov/jLevov. ("Forthe Understanding modifies and converts every hindranceto action into furtherance of itsprime aim. So thatchecks to action actually advance it, and obstacles inthe way promote Forprogress.") Marcus,nothing is in unqualified fashion but the Good"goodto whom

"1 88 MARCUS AURELIUSWill," lays no claim to extensive sovereignty. It maybe remembered that Ficbte, in one of his eloquentpopular writings, rests upon this noble feebleness ofthe will in the exterior world, a supreme argument forhuman immortality. So vii. 68 : del<ydp poi TO irapovv\rj dperfjs KT\. Hav yap TO (TVjAJBalvov6eu>fjdvOpcoTra)eoiKeiouTcu (adapts and assimilates to itself).x. 3 1 TI yap nrdvTa ravra a\\o : e<nt, 7T\rjv yv/juvdafjiara\oyov ecopaicoTOs d/cpi/Bcos K. rdv TO><f>vcri,o\6ya)<; /3iw ;Meve ovv pe^pis eoncetwo-fls crawru) K.o><?ravra, oeppco/jLevo? <7To/jLa%osTrdvra e^oiKeioi, co? TO \afjL7rpov irvp= ( iv. 1) 6Vi av /3d\7js (f)\6ya ef avrwv K. avyrjv Troiel."(Eendall What are they all but exercises for Reason,:scientifically and philosophically facingthe facts oflife ? Persevere, then, till you make them part of yourown being, just as the healthy stomach assimilates itsfood, or a quick fire burns everything you throw on itinto flame and light.")9. Now it must be noted that this process entirelydepends upon the Soul. In themselves, things areblind and dumb, colourless and immovable. It is wewho draw them to ourselves, call them as it werewithin range of our Reason, and submit them to thealchemical process. In themselves they have nosubstantive existence : the world of phenomena is aglittering mirage ; it ismdyd (or illusion). To suchidealism, tending even towards solipsism, has the earlymaterialism of the Porch been forced ! iv. 3.Keepamong the weapons most ready to hand," ev rofc Trpothesetwo, convictions, cv on ra/u,ei>u^ aTTTerai T/}? tyvxrjs,d\\ ea>ecmjiceyal 8e 6)(\rj(T6^ e/cevbov VTTO\-(" Things(Jiovrjs rfjscannot touch the Soul, but stand

eavTwvABSOLUTE SUBJECTIVITY 189without it stationary ;tumult can arise onlyfrom viewswithin ourselves."R) He repeats this with emphasis ;v. 19 : Ta npdyjKiTa avra ov& OTTWCTTLOVV ^V^TI?airrerai, ou8 exet euro&oy nrpos ^v^ijv, ou8e Tpetyai ov$e/civrjcrai yfrv^v Svvarai. Tpeiret, Be K. Kivel avrr) eavrrjvK. O LCDV av Kpifjidrcov Kara^tooay eavrrjv ToiavraTroiei Ta Trpoa-vtyeo-Twra. (" Things materialcannot touch the Soul in any way whatever, nor findentrance there, nor have power to swayor move it.Soul is self -swayed, self-moved ; modifying the objectsupon which it plays into accord with the judgmentswhich it approves." E.) Thus an outer world, thatunsubstantial fabric of impressions to the creation ofwhich we contribute so much, reading ourselves intoit rather than yielding to its impress, this Heracliteanseparatedomain of each consciousness where no otherguest or companion can be admitted, is a phantomcalled up or exorcized at our will. vi. 8 TO Hyefjiovifcbv:e. TO eavrb eyelpovK. rpeirov K. iroiovv fiev eavrb olovav K. 6e\rj iroiovv Se eavrq) fyalvecrOai TTCLV TO crv^alvov"olov avrb 6e\et (= self - excited and self - swayed,which makes itself just what it wills to be, and all thatbefalls seem to itself what itwills.") $aiv6/jLeva meredeceptive semblances, exercising no power or influenceat all on our judgments.vi. 52 :"Egeo-ri irepl TOVTCOVfjuqbev viro\appdveiv K. (JLTJ 6^\ela0ac Ty ^v^y. Avrayap Ta ripdyjuiaTa OUK e xci cjwau TTOITJTIKTJJ TCOVKpio-ecov.So ix. 15 : Ta IIpdyfjLaTaea>6upw^(stand without the doors obedient servitors, waitingfor our call, meaningless congeries of letters expectantof an arrangement into an alphabet, a rationalsentence), avTae<f> /jLrjSev fjb^Te %Bora rreplavTO)v fjLiJT aTro^aivdfjieva. They have no message ;or

"""T^/JiaS."ypdfaiv"MARCUS AURELIUSrather like ghosts, cannot speak unless first interrogatedby a mortal. It is only the craven soul who yields tothe notion that they can tyrannize. Lupi Mcerimvidere priores."The bold magician confronts theapparition in his own good time, undeterred by thedisconcerting yet harmless gibbering of the Spectres.Rather it is he who summons them at pleasure ;ofthemselves, they cannot and dare not burst into hissolitude. Tl ovv aTrofyaiverai TreplavTwv ;TOHye/AoviKov. So once more xi. 11 : El ^ev ovv OUKepXTai eir! at Ta ripdy^aTa wv al Sioo^et^ K.6opvfBovo~i ae, d\\a Tpoirov TLVCL aino<$ eV e/celvaTb yOVV KpljJMl TO 7T6pldVTWV r)O-V%a%TQ),(jii>eidTpcjAourra (not budging, not stirring(frwyala foot insideyour magic circle, like docile and well-disposed Ariels).R. : The things it so perturbs you to seek or shun, donot come to you rather ; you go to them ; only let yourjudgment of them holds its peace, and their side willremain stationary."10. xi. 16. The fairest life (icd\\iVTa Sia&v) comesfromindifferenceto all things not under our power:fj,e/jivrjfj,evosOTL ovbev CIVTWV V7r6\r)\lriv Trepl avTOve/JLTTOiei Ou8 pXTCU<f>AX\O, TCL/JLrjfjiel^ Be ecrfjiev ol ra? Trepl CIVTWV Kptcreis yevvctiVTes K.(olov) ypd<f)ovTesev eaurot?, e^bv fiev fj>rjefoz>8e Kav TTOV \ddrj evOvs ea\etyaLR. :Nothing canimbue us with a particular view about itself or enforcean entrance ; things are stationaryit is we who;originate judgments regarding them, and, as it were,inscribe them upon our minds, when we need inscribenothing, or can instantaneously efface any inscriptionwritten there unawares." The Sophists had claimed forthe individual the most perfect freedom in assent and

"Common""""""ABSOLUTE SUBJECTIVITY 191acceptance of convention ;the Sceptics (as SextusEmpiricus shows us throughout his work), while preserving this fundamental subjectivity or relativity intheory, had insisted in practice on the wisdom offollowing the custom of the country and Lucian;the popularizer of this half-agnostic, half-dogmaticreaction in favour of society, rejects with ridicule andindignation the pretensions of mystical egoism. He laysdown the rule that happiness is found only in theLife, and in wise submission to commonplace(piov KOLVOV airacTL jBiovv afywv K.rofc vroXXofc, ov&ev a\\oKOTOv K.TeTv^w^Hermotimus).The Stoic while seeming to canonize the social aim,speaks and writes about it in such a wayas to leavea loophole for evading its responsibilities ; partly bypreaching the claims of the wider 77-0X^9 of Nature withwhich they supposed themselves in fuller sympathy,partly also by advancing the policy of abstention, asGod in the world, so the Sage in society." Again, theearly Sophists, the Aufklarung of ancient Greece,taught a complete subjective impressionalism and as;man in his social life had no real guide or criterionbut utility, so in his more personal side he was alonein the middle of incommunicable sensations which werevalid only for himself. It is perhaps reserved for MarcusAurelius to declare that the unknowable source of thesevarying feelings and emotions is itself, like the supposedfabric of the moral and Social Law, pure hallucination.It is true that he does not commit himself to denyingthe existence of phenomena ;but they exist purelysubjectively, in the terms and at the will and pleasureof the mind, which neglects, estimates, or employs.

"""me""""""""""192 MARCUS AURELIUSSeduced by this motionless, yet inviting mirage in life swilderness, the unwary soul submits itself to a voluntaryslavery rebus;subjungere conor," the modernadaptation to environment (a phrase which theEmperor must have condemned as abandoning life scentral truth). Te facimus Fortuna deam Coeloquelocamus." But the Sage, like Adam amid the lowercreatures, gives names and values to things which inthemselves have neither meaning nor coherence.11. Thus, in spite of theoretical citizenship innatural and social commonwealth, the Sageis drivenback into himself. We are now approaching the mostsignificant part of Marcus Philosophy, just thatnotable point of transition in which the influence ofPlato supersedes that of Zeno and Chrysippus. Ofextant authors in that age, Dio Chrysostomusis thelast who preserves the somewhat narrow common-sense,the mental balance, the acquiescence in superficialverities, which we usually associate with Stoicism.Excluding Lucian, who like Voltaire had no originality,and belonged to no recognized school but that of opulentbourgeois" respectability, all the rest are tingedwith mysticism: the sense of worlds undreamt-ofby the vulgar, to which access was found throughmeditation or orgiastic cult. Aristides unites thebeliefs of Christian Science with the study of nightlyvisions, that borderland of the soul in which twoconsciousnesses may be distinguished (see Yon Drel sPhilosophy of Mysticism), and the astral body beunited to its cognate spirit, the Earth-Soul. Appuleius,like some allegoristof Cinderella and Jack theGiant-killer," cleverly interweaves with a well-knownromance certain significant episodes, as Cupid and

"ABSOLUTE SUBJECTIVITY 193Psyche/ with a view to a Platonic moral, and findsin the deliverance from carnal snares the work of Isison behalf of her votary. Numenius, one of the obscurelinks in the transmission of the Platonic tradition,represents to us rather the general tendency toTrinitarian doctrine ;but we need not doubt thathis ethical system founded on this was a direct andpersonal illumination. Inwardness," or the intrinsictreasures of Soul, was the predominant idea and;we look confidently in Marcus for further illustration.Nor are we disappointed.

"""""""CHAPTER IVHAPPINESS AND DESTINY OF MAN SSPIRIT(A)SELF-SUFFICINGNESS OF THE SOULANALYSIS% 1. The impregnable fastness of the Soul.2. Contentment with Self the supreme End; a self-centred peace ;"our true and intrinsic good cannot depend on another."3. Little success in convincing others of \6yos indwelling ; averageman prefers to be left to zest and uncertainty of old life.% 4.Serenitysynonyms.the unvarying aim of the Schools (various1. WE will first examine those passages in whichhe dwells on the Self-sufficingness of the consciousspiritwe shall then notice the unquestionably mystical;language of certain sections, where we seem to bereading Plotinus a century before his time and con;clude the survey of the Doctrine of Man with acollection of those phrases which speak of the DeityWithin," and from the crude materialism of early Stoicidentification of voepov nrvp in Man and in God, elevatea system, more or less complete, of mystical Theology.Coelum non animurn mutant qui trans marecurrunt; similarly Marcus reproveshimself for desiring artificial seclusion, aypoi,Kia$ K. alyia\ovs K. oprj, ..,when it is at any moment within our power to194

"<"""HAPPINESS OF MAN S SPIRIT 195retreat to the undisturbed fastness of our own soul,and there find a peace which passes understanding:e%ov 97?av w/oa? e0e\r)<rr)S is ionnov a.vu\(Dpelyap ovf? fjcrv^itoTepov OVT dirpay/JLOveo-Tepovpel r) els Trjv eavrov ^v%^, ^aki<J&ToiavTa els OL eyKuij/as ev Trdo~y evjjLapeia evOvsK. : Nowhere can man find retirement morepeaceful and untroubled than in his own soul ; speciallyhe who hath stores within, a glance at which straightway sets him at perfectease." For the soul is free ifit will but recognise and claim itsempire (one ofindependence rather than actual mastery),ov/c eV*-fjuyvvTcu \6Lcos r) rpd^ews KivovjjLevq) TrvevjjLan (pneumaticcurrent of life and the vital emotions)TOaTraf eauTTjy diroXdpr] K.yvtopio-r)rrjv. vii. 28 : Els aauroy owciXou. $V(TW yap\oyLicbvH<yeiJLOViKoveaurw dpKelaOat Si/caiOTrpayovvTiK. Trap avro TOVTO ya\ijvr)v e^ovn. The verb ap/cecoin its impersonal neuter sense apicel,suffices/of theit is enough, itis used in a technical sense about a dozen timessufficiencyof thingsbefore us as an occasion(afyopprj) for moral action ;but its chief technical useis in the passive, in which it refers to the contentmentof soul with itself. iii. 6. He gives himself full permission to follow the new Ideal, if he can discoveranything better (Kpelrrov) than justice, truth, temperance, courage, which he sums up as KaOdira^ rovdpKio-6ai laurfj rrjv Aidvoiav. iv. 25. Coupled withcontentment with the apportioned lot is the truer andinward satisfaction of the man, dpKoujxeVou T?} ISia Trpdgei.iv. 32. He pities the foolish strivers of yesterday,"dead and forgotten now, who went after other gods,"TTOielv TO KaTa TTJV ISuxy KaraaKeurji K. TOVTOVd<f>evTas

""""196 MARCUS AURELIUSe^eadat tc. TOVTO) dpiccurOai. v. 14: "Reasonand the reasoning process are in themselves andtheir action self-sufficing faculties(SiW/i-a?el<nv2. He forgets, perhaps, that the exercise of theintellectual faculty is its own reward," if it in any wayattain truth ;whereas the soul cannot but mourn theineffectiveness of moral effort. Doubt of the formerdoes but lead to a scepticism which is far fromunpleasing but a sense of futility, however comforted;by eulogy of the initial act of willing, cannot but leadin the other sphere to pessimism.vii. 66. We mustask if Socrates was then content (el eSiWro dpjceio-OaiTO) Sifcaios elvai KT\. The word, pregnant with atechnical meaning, occurs six times in the Eighth Book,of which the more interesting are 7, ApKeircu Trdo-a<j)vaw eaimj evoSova-y. 45 (already quoted), thedeity within "ifdpicoujxei/os,it can feel and act afterthe ordering of its own constitution." R. 48 :A/caTa/jidxrjTOV yiverai TO Hye/Jbovircbvorav et? eaurdcru<rrpa(J>y apKco-Ot] eaurw ; The Self -sufficing Soul invincible. ix. 26 :AverXrjs fjuvpia Sia TO prj dpiceurOcuTO>crw Hyefiovuccp, TTQIQVVTI Tavra els a KareaKevacrTat.ix. 42 : OVK dpKet Tovrq) OTL Kara fyvcriv rrjv w^v TIa\\a TOVTOV /jLHT0ov f^ret? ; ct>9 el 6 6(f)6a\fjLosa-rrrj-rei OTI /3\67ret. There isnothing beyondthe performance of the individual act in accordancewith eternal dogmata there is no; recompense hereor elsewhere ; but, what is far more dispiriting, thereis no real assurance that the Right will ultimatelyprevail for by the very terms of his creed Marcus;cannot put off to some future time in a gradual process(to which even his poor actions could contribute) a

""""""""HAPPINESS OF MAN S SPIRIT 197Perfection which was ever present, here and now.for justification of its behaviour, Soul looks within tothe peace which arises from a view of life essentiallynegative, self-centred, and abstentionist. See alsoxi. 11. Nothing exists for the Eeason except itsown (voluntary) judgments,itsvTroKy-fyisand this;isalways under its control. ii. 15 : Ilav uir6\T]\|is. . . iv. 3 (ad fin.) : fO/3io<; UTTO\T)\|HS (whereSo,/coo>io5 a\\ola>crw 6Kendall s admirable translationperhaps misses a little the sadness of the diction :The world is a process of variations ; life, a processofiv. 7 :*Apov rrjv viroX^^tv, rjprai, TOviews").fiefiXajjLfjLai""Get rid of the assumption; therewith you get rid of the sense, I am an injuredman. vii. 33 :(H Aiavoia rrjv eau-rijs ya.\r\vv]v Kara|^?"|\T]v|/iF Siarrjpel K. ov xetpov TO Hye/jLovi/cbv yeyove.K. : The understanding in abstraction (or accordingto its view maintains its")calm, and the Inner Selfis unimpaired."13. viii. 40. Marcus has but scanty hope that theaverage man will identify himself, as he advises, withthis abstracted but impotent Eeason. Here is a littlecolloquy Take away your own view of what you:regard as painful, and you stand unassailable. But ofVery noticeable is his subjective usage and definition of the objective1effyiotpos, V. last . rb devfj-oipos, ayadriv fiolpav <recruT<3 aTroveifj-as,and the "goodfortunes or lucks "which most men deem external tothemselves, or to be obtained by propitiating capricious deities, in anycase, not beneath their direct control, are dyadai rpoirai ^i^x^s ay.appal ay. irpd^eis. For it is incredible that our true good could be inany one else s hands. Thus Teleology influences ethics, but is notpermitted to reconstruct metaphysics ; for purpose without a personalaim is inconceivable. Mere mechanical interaction of parts cannot,without violence to language and prejudice, be termed an end-in-itself.

""198 MARCUS AURELIUSwhat you is this true ? Of Reason. But Reason andI are not the same. Very good then spare Reason ; (?)the pain of giving itself pain and if some other; partof you is amiss, let it keep that view to itself" (eavrrjv arjv uiro\v)i|ui. . . az/ro? ev dcr<f>a\6(rTdTq)T/9 airro?; 6 Aoyos A\X S OUK eljju Xoyos.*Eo-To) KT\. Here is a difficulty and a new featurein Stoicism. Aurelius, like all mystics, identifies hisreal self with an attenuated spiritual and divineprinciple which has nothingin common with humaninterests. Now the average man refuses to considerhimself in the light of an organ of impersonalReason," or as a character in someone else s dream. 1The whole relation of this IVoO? 6vpa6ev elcriwv tothe complex human framework, where it is for atime and to no purpose imprisoned,is beset withdoubts and problems. We shall have to examine,when we approach the Universe from the objectiveside, the passages in which Marcus in theory recognises the monopsychism, which in his practice he soclearly rejects. Now, what is this /1 070$ in the otherman, of whose very presence he is unconscious ? Perchance he sleepeth, and must be awaked." A divineindwelling, but solely in potentiality (Suvd/tei), and inthe vast majority of men never reaching efficiency,a puzzling and, perhaps, useless belief. The nature ofman tends to break up from the popular dualism ofsoul and body into a number of distinct parts, thesix or seven selves of Indian mysticism, the ( H<ye-PQVIKOV, the Dianoea, the ^0709, the Soul, which everynow and again have a sharp contrast of outline, thoughwe know very well they are in the end identical : and1See the last scene in Alice through the Looking -Glass.

"""""""What"HAPPINESS OF MAN S SPIRIT 199most difficult of all the constant representation of theSoul as the pious verger of an Idol in an unspottedan Ion withoutTemple,"his unreflecting joyousness.The question still remains,is a particleof God doing in that unpromising dungeon ?true even with the Pantheist that the source of lifeattains self -consciousness in man ? Is it not truethat itonly reaches this doubtful blessing in the rareand infrequent Sage, who then, mouthpiece of theAlmighty or his very self, unhesitatingly condemns theCosmic Process as cruel and meaningless? Yet forthe average man, happy in his delusion, it retains itscharm and zest. The feud between Philosophy andthe people of which Plato spoke, in its new phase ofScience versus Democracy,"Isbids fair to be perennial.4. We return to simpler topics, viii. 28 :7TOZ/09 1JTOI TGO (T^/JLaTL fCCl/COV OVKOVV a7TO(f)aiV6O dcO. rjrf} ^vyf) aXX e^ecrTtv avrf) rty iStay aldpicu K. ya,\-f]vr]v&La(f)v\d(T<Ti>vK. fir) V7ro\a^^dveiv on /ca/cov. JTacrayap Kplais K. K.op/Arj opet? K. evbov e/CK\icrt<; K. ovoevKCLKOV a>Sdva/Baivei,. ix. 13 :%e(3a\ov iraaav irepia-Taviv(he corrects the words 6^i)\6ov }becauseef&>OVK fjv aXX evSov Iv Tat? uiroX^vJ/eai).So 32 : vroXXairepio a a irepieXelv TWV evo^XovvTwv GQI SwacraL, oXaeVt rfj u-TToXi^vf/etaov Keifieva. The same is true ofother men s unkind actions ; they have no real objectiveexistence, and exist in and harm only their souls, beingno concern of ours; xi. 18 (7): ov% al Trpdgei? avrwvevofaovaiv riplv eiceivat yap e. ev rot? e/ceivwv ri^e^ioviKol^,maxims andaXX al fjperepai uTroXrjiJ/ets.xii. 8.Amongdefinitions, he reminds himself on Trdvra uiroXtnl/is ;so22, 26 : "On irdvra uiroXTuJas K. avrrj eV* COL ^Apov ovvore ^eXet? Trjv uir6XT)\|/i^, K. &o"irep Ka^^rdvn Tijv a/cpav,fitO

""200 MARCUS AURELIUScnaOepa Travra K. KO\TTOS aKupuv (a beautiful passagethough the ore 0eXet9 is untrue to the experience of mostmen ;which Kendall thus translates : The view taken iseverything, and that rests with yourself. Disown theview at will ;and behold the headland rounded, thereis calm, still water, and a waveless bay So 25:").Bd\e efct) T7)V uTT<$\T]v|/n>,K. crecrcocrai, I There s nothingoutside corresponding to your fears, hopes, anxieties.The words used to convey this imperturbable serenity,single point of equilibrium and permanence, in anunstable and dissolving world, are mostly common toother Stoic writers, though Marcus inserts some of hisown. Above all, he delights to employ the terms ofHedonism, as religious writers sometimes seem to profaneheavenly raptures by the similes of earthly love. AsSeneca borrows his texts for the Lucilian sermons fromEpicurus, so Marcus takes from the Cyrenaic school ofsensationalism the language of voluptuous enjoyment.One term in very general use, arapagta, he uses onceonly (just as avrdpiceia and evSaL^ovia occur but once):alOpia, ydXjjvrj, d\V7ria, TO aTraiOpidcrai ("calm,"gain uncloudedii.4), ev^elv, evOv^la (a Democritean word),evfjidpeta, evfjuoipia, evoSta, and evoSew several times,evpovs and evpoeiv, evpv^copia (recalling the Psalm :Thou hast set my feet in a large room "), evo-raOeiv,cvo-^oXelvy eixfipoo-vwrj, and often. x. 1. Av<f)patvivunique instance, 770-^770-77 is used in a good sense, andcoupled with dpfceo-Oijo-y,and in same section whereT^SOI T) is used in its invariably bad sense ;for intwenty-three places it is that which the good manshuns and the vulgar identify with the Good) OvfjL-qbia(in good sense), o-corrjpia, vyieia, fyaibpvveiv : whileis used now of lower pleasures ;iii. 6 :

ffavrbvHAPPINESS OF MAN S SPIRIT 201rovapLo"rov evpicTKOfjievov a7ro\av . . .ifiovwv ;now of delight in the higher life, ITore yelpa7rXoT77T09 diroXauaeis, x. 9 and Ti \oiirov; fjdiroXaueii/TOV %r)v (xii. 29), avvaTTTovra d\\o eV a\Xw dyaQov ;x. 33 Airo\av(Tiv :yap Set vtroXafji/Bdvetv irav o riet-eaTiv Kara TTJV l^iav $v<rivevepyiv (whereas threetimes in viii. 1 and x. 1 the word has a bad connotation). 1In the same direction points the frequency of theword Iv Soj/ to express the true life of man, whetheras epithet of Daemon (ii. 13, 17, iii.16), or inanother metaphor of the will (TO evbov xvpievov, iv. 1) :"EySov^XeTre. vii. 59 : "E^Soiyap 77 7177777 rov A<ya0ovK. ael ava/3\veiv Swajjievr) eav Kal crKCLTrrr)^. x. 38 :Me /AWT)(TO OTL TO VeVpOQ-ITadTOVVi<TTlV K6WO TO Kk&OI/y/cK,pv/jL/jLevov . . . eicelvQ %(0ij eiceivo (el Bel elirelv)1That for the Stoics, as for the followers of Epicurus, a felt andexperienced satisfaction, and not an outward code, is the final criterion,no one can doubt who reads Marcus carefully (or, for that matter,Epictetus either). As with Socrates in the Memorabilia, virtueresults from the discovery that there are pleasures more intense andlasting than those of "sense" (n TjSiw TOVTUV). v. 9. To the objectorthat sensual gratification is irpocrrjvtcrTfpoi ,he eagerly denies the position ;it is due to inexperience 6ed<rai el irpo<rrjveo-Tpov /-teyaXo^ux/a 4\ev-6epia ct7rX6T?7S cvyvw^offvvrj 6^6x77?. AVTIJS yap (fipovrio-eus (which, asembodying something of speculative knowledge, he puts after the puremoral virtues) rt Trpo<r7)vt(rTepoi> ; 8rav TO &irTou.a Tov K. e&povv iv iraffi TTJSirapaKoXovd-iiTiKTJs K. tiri<rT7)/j,oi>iKTJs 8vvd/jt,ews ^dv/mrjO^ ("Smooth unhaltingflow of its intelligence and apprehension."Again, we shall have to notice later, vii. 13 : otiirw <je . . .ti<f>paiviTO eue/ryeretj ,and again O^TTW o>s e5TTOIU>J>,where the test ofattainment is the pleasure derived from a virtuous action it is the;R.).stage where to the wise rjd^a are ra fiva-et ydta, in a perfect accordbetween objective truth and inner desire ;or Clemens Alexandrinusascent from TT/OTIS to yvuxns . So viii. 1 : HeTreipacrcu yap irepl 7r6<raovdapov e5pes rb 6tl . . .ijv vii. ;67 : tv 6

"""""202 MARCUS AURELIUSdv0pa)7ros. (The Will, the Power within which pullsthe wires in life s puppet show.)(B) MYSTICAL TENDENCIES AND THE DOCTKINE OFDEITY WITHIN5. Soul as aANALYSIS"self -rounded sphere" ;as a Daemon within.as an Emanation from God;5. This preoccupation with the interior dispositionissues in vague mystical language, like later Platonicrhapsodies xi. 1 2; is, perhaps, the most notable passage :The soul becomes a self-rounded sphere when itneither strains outward nor contracts inward by selfconstrictionand compression, but shines with the lightby which it sees all truth without and truth within."vxfis avToeiSr)? orav /^r eKTeivrjrai eVt TIeaa) avvrpe^rj fjiijTe cnreiprjTat, fJLTjre avvi^dvrj d\\a(frcorl Xd/jiTrrjTai, a) rrjv a\r)6euav opa rrjv Hdvrwv K.Trjv ev avry. So viii. 41 :icvK\oT6pr)s pevei (where E. :fOrav ryevrjTaL crfyalposThe freehold ofnone other may contravene ... so longpoised as a sphere self-orbed ").xii. 2 :the Mindas it abidesGod seesmen s Inner Selves stripped of their material shellsand husks and impurities. Mind to mind, His mentalbeing touches only the like elements in us derivativeefrom Him." O 6eos irdvra ra rjyefjioviKa ryvfiva rcovvKiK&v dyyeiwvK. K. <j)\olcov KaOapfjuaTOW opa.M.OVWyap TO) Eawrov voepw fAOvcov aTrrerai TWV e^ e Eavrovet? ravra eppvrjKOTcov K.aTrco^erev/jievcDV.We havenow reached the final stage,when the soul of man isdefinitely pronounced not merely Divine, but a part of

"HAPPINESS OF MAN S SPIRIT 203God s very essence ;the remaining passages need nocomment, they speak for themselves; and we mayremember that in Marcus lips these words are notrivial or idle metaphor as in early Stoicism, but theprofoundest truth. ii. 1 : Betas d-n-ojioipas /^ero^o?.4 : Set aladecrOai TWOS SIOLKOVVTOS TOV KOO-/JLOV diroppoiavTrecrTrjs. 13 :apfcel 77/305 fJLovq*TOO evSov eavTov Aaipoiaelvai. ii. 12. Eeason s part it is to consider TTW?aTrrerai, Oeov avOpcoTros K. tcara TL eavrov fjueposK. orav7TW5 Sia/ceTjTat, TO TOV av6pa)7rov TovTo fjioptov.Thesereservations are entirely out of place in any monisticsystem ;still more in a scheme of materialistic monism."Every part of man touched God, for God was all."The indifferent Gnostic was far more logical in hisdoctrine of the uncontaminated indwelling of thedivine spirit quite irrespective of any act of theanimal complex. The companionship was never rivenapart. We can see how the Emperor, for all his theorytrembles on the brink of aof unity and acquiescence,dualism so unabashed that mysticismbecomes the onlyremedy. ev TO>Trjpeiv TOV evSov AcufAoya17: (0tXocro(/>ta). . .ao-Lvrj. iii. 3 : To fj,ev yap vov<$ K. Aatfjiwy, TO e 717K.\vOpo<$.iii. 4 :le/jeu? Tt? . . . K. virovpryos Oewv,Xpco/jievos K. evftov avTov TO> lSpvfj,ev<p (= priest andminister of the Gods, using also as some sacred oracularshrine that deity planted in his breast ;Saint Cadog sdefinition of conscience,eyeof God in the soul ofman." iii. 5 : 6 ev crol Oebs eo-Tco TrpoaTaTr}^.-iii. 6 :TOV evibpvfjLevov ev crol o Aaifjioi/os.. . .yap TOV eavTovvovv K. Acujiom = iii.( 3) ... Trpoekofievo^. . . ov<rTevd%eL iii. 12 :ToveavTov Aaijioi/a KaOapov eTrjpelv.iii. 16 : Tov Be ev&ov ev TW a-TtjOei,iu,r) (frvpeiv . . . a\\aiXecov SiaTrjpelv.v. 1 :

"/^epos""204 MARCUS AURELIUS6 dvayKaa-cov TOVTOV Trapa/Bfjvai, ( = TOV efjibv OebvK. Aaipora). v. 21 :T&Vev o~ol TO /cpdriaTOV Tipaeo~TiBe TOVTO TO E/ceivq) o/jioyeves. v. 27 :Troiovaav oara /3ov\6rai 6 Aai|Aa>i>bv eicdo~T(j)= iii.( 5) K. rjyefjiova o Zevs eSa)/cev, diroo-Traafjta eavrov.-viii. 7 : H TOV dv0pa)7rov <f>vo-i<;eamv dvfjL7roSlo"rovK. voepds K. Sifcatas. viii. 45 : efa>TOV epovi\(0v (= satisfied, apKovpevov).xi. 1 9 : TOUTOTL^rjo-r)^. xii. 2 : Souls TWV e% EavTov .TQ)v K.aTTCD^eTevfjievcov.. . . TOV ev aoi OeiOTepov fikpovs Trj aTipo-Tepa K. Ovr)Tr) fAoipa.xii. 1 : eav TO ev O~OL Sclav. .eppvrj/coxii.3 : tXecw? TO> aavTovACUJJKW Siafiitovai. 2 3 OVTO) :yap K. 60eo(|>6pT]TosfapofjLevos fcaTa TdVTCi 6ew. R. "vessel of God: (cf.viii. 2 :io~ov6/jbo$ Oea)).K. eiceWev eppvrjfcev.xii. 26 : o eicdo~Tov vous Oeos(O) THE PKOBLEM OF MONOPSYCHISMANALYSIS"""6. Solidarity of Soul-nature ; all from vopbvto ivhich manhas inlet at will (Emerson).7. Averroism and its problems ;"how can the true self be identified with this alien portion of God ?6. We have now to consider (1) the strangeproblem of Monopsychism already hinted at ;and (2)the ultimate destiny of the (so-called) individual soulafter death. We note the "indifference" of othermen s souls clearly set forth in viii. 56 : To>TTpOCLipeTlKU) TO TOV 7T\r)CrloV TTpOaipeTtKOVd^id(j)opov eo-Tiv, just as his tiny vital force and poorflesh. Kal yapel OTI paXivTa d\\r]\cov eve/fev yeyo-

""""DESTINY OF MAN S SPIRIT 205vafiev OfjL&s TO, rjyeiAOviKa fjn&v etcao-TOv rrjv lotav Kvpiav%ei,. Here, as we saw above, the independence of eachfsoul is maintained ;iva/jurjeV aXX&>y TOStill, 54 :MrjKert, povov av/jLTrveiv rwaepi, aXX ^rj K.av^povelv rc3Noepw. Ov jap f)TTOi> i] voepd Bvva/JLis Trdvrr) KK.^ia7T6(f>oiTrjK6TW cfJTCKTaL bwdfjievu) rjirep rjra> avcnrvevaai. iv. 29. He is an offshoot separatedfrom the State, 6 ryv ISlav ^v^rjv r^9 rwv \oyiKa>vaTroo"%l%wv jxids ov<J7]<s.iv. 4 : El TO voepbv TJJJLLV KOI^O^,K. 6 X070? KCL& OV \OyiKOl KOICOS.<7fJ,6VEl . . .TOVTO,K. O I^OyLtO? KOLVOS el TOVTO, TToXlTClL . . .6(7/jLV 6t TOVTO6 KocrfMos a)advi TroXt? .(the intermediate steps ofthe progressive Syllogism are unimportant). . . .E/cei0v Be etc TT}? KOLV^ TavTt]^ TroXew?,K. avTO TONoepov K. \oyiKov K. vofiiKov rjfuv . . . wcrTrep yap TO760)^69 fJiOt CLTTO TtZ/09 7^9 aTTOjJbIJiepLO~TaL, KT\. . . . K.TO Bep/mbv K. etc 7Tf|Oa>S69TWOS ISta? ^777^9 OVTO). . .or) K. TO Nocpoi/ rjicei iroOev.This doctrine isexpressed in general terms, iv.f40 : /29 ey l^wov TOV KOCT/JLOV, plav ovaiav K.fxia>/eTre-^ov, o~vve%ws etrivoelv,K. 7TW9Trjv TOVTOV irdvTa dvaStSoTai, K. 7ra>9 opfjiy jita rrdvTa7rpdao~eL K. oia Tt9 . . . rj <rvwr}O t$ K.av^rjpva ^ the("contexture and concatenation of the web Man").has thus an inlet at pleasure into the rationalelement, as Emerson might say, into the Over-Soul ;but this section implies that the privilege is but rarelyclaimed, and but seldom exercised. How then can wereconcile this with the statement of absolute identity ;such as is affirmed in some of the previous citations,and appears with certitude in the later Books ? Forexample, ix. 8 What could well be more Averroistic:

206 MARCUS AURELIUSthan this ? (touse an inaccurate but convenient expression) El? pev ra a\oya : <wajuaet9 3e ra \oytKa /JLIO, voepa ^v^K. fxta yfj eo"nv a7rdvra)v T&V yecaBwv K. evl (am opay"K. eVa depa dvaTrveo^ev. (K. The Soul distributed:among the irrational animals is one, and so too the Soulinstinct with mind, that isportioned out among therational ; just as earth is one in all things earthly, andthe light one by which we see, the air one whichwe breathe.") Again, ix. 39 : \^Hroi\ CLTTO juas 77777?;?z/oe/Da? irdvra w? evl aa^fian eirucrvpfiaivei,. ("[Either]All things spring from a single source possessed ofmind, and combine and fittogether as for a singlebody.") Although cast in the form of an alternative,Marcus clearly here sets forth his personal faith. Inanother statement of alternatives, riroi o-Ke$acr/j,b$ . . .rj TpoTrr) (x. 7), he uses absorptionist language ;but itis not clear whether he here wishes to express theresumption of the logical as well as the physical partof his nature ; though, as he cannot exclude, he maywell be supposed to mclude wcrre K. ravTa dva\rj<f>-Qr)vai et? TOV rov 6\ov Abyov etre Kara irepiobovefCTrvpov/juevovetr dlStois djjioifBals dvaveovfievov.Similarly 14, he speaks of T Trdvra SiSovay K.7. xii. 2. The souls are, as we saw, spoken ofas flowing forth from God, like the several channelsall owing origin to some fount or lake (ef eavrcveppvrjfcora and aTrco^erevpeva), just as 26, e/ceiOeveppvrjtce.So in xii. 32 apportionment of tiny pieceof time, substance, soul, to each, TTOCTTOV Se rfjs 0X779aTro/jiefjiepiaTai, e/cda-TO)) Troarov Be; TTJ? 0X779jwhere he seems to include the vivific and the

"NowDESTINY OF MAN S SPIRIT 207intelligent principle though it might be maintained that;he meant the former alone, and that for the z/oO?, hereverted to the old legend of a guardian angel, setapart to each by Zeus, a distinct being, tcvpitos<rov;but other passages display impartially the other andcontradictory view. So it becomes difficult to see how(xii. 3) the third element in man, this very vovs, whichis itself a God (0eo?), can be povov Kvpiws <rov ; especiallyif we find these words at the close of the book ;3 :"Ev (w9 T)\LOV, KCLVfjuvplois.Mia. ovala KOivr} fcavBielpfyrjraL ro/^ot? opeaiv aXXot?SieipyrjTai, l&uus Trotcn?cr(t)fjLa<ri, fAVpiois. Mia ^v^f)KCLV (frvcreai8. iivplais re.ISlai? 7T6pi<ypa<l)a1<;.Mta voepa ^v^r) Kav $LafC6Kplo-Oai,Soicfj.the rest of things though one in originare dvaurOrjTa and avonceiwr a\\rf\oi,^] they are heldtogether by the Central Principle (TO voovv) and bygravitation (!TO eVl ravra ftpl6ov\ Aiavoia 8e 1810)$eTTi TO 6fji6(f)v\ovTivTcu K. avvicna TaL K. ov &Lip<yeTai,TO KOIVWVIKOV TrdOos (instinct of association or community cannot be held apart)."But this is clearlya Counsel of Perfection, in a better world ;it is notMarcus concrete experience, which tells him that hehas nothing in common with other men except asympathy and compassion,all on his side and unrequited after all. (D) IMMORTALITYANALYSIS8. Close connexion with preceding problem of individ. andunivers. soul; whether souls survive or not, indifferent tomoral duty."9. Soul capax aeterni"but not therefore eternal ;world s interestto dissolve and rearrange ; extinction or transference?

"""""208 MARCUS AURELIUS10. (Texts illustrating his doubt of personal survival.)11. Pessimistic scorn of Immortality.12. "If the gods could have bestowed it, they would have" ( = acomplete justification and Theodicy).13. Marcus, however sceptical, feels himself safe with the HigherPowers.8. The same problems as to the relation of individual and universal Soul wait around the question ofImmortality. It is interesting to notice that of theseultimate and metaphysical points, God, freedom,immortality,"the Stoic pronounced ex cathedrd uponthe second alone. Certainty, except in the one fact ofmoral liberty, was no part of the later Stoical development. Every question is posited as an alternative ;whether the world ie ruled by Providence, or whetherthere is a mere Welter (KVKG^V), cannot possiblyconcern my nature, which as rational and self-determining can only find the end of its being in moralaction. 1So, whether Souls survive or not, affects in nodegree my principles (Boyfjiara)of life s duties. LikeKant, Seneca Epictetus and Marcus seem to agreein subordinating speculative certainty the; practicalproblem was no problem to them. And the stimulusto this was probably the same in all ;a quite personalor instinctive prejudice in favour of a course of conductfor which the arguments are by no means conclusive.Kant preferred to talk loftily of Duty (whatevermeaning he attached to the idea); while the Koman philosophers, with Hellenic sobriety and self-centred common1 ix. 28 : T6 5 "0\ov efre 0^os, e& * v^VTOi ("All s well with theworld") efre rb CIKTJ, /AT) Kttl vif elicy. xii. 14 (quoted in full elsewhere),el fivp/Jibs dvrjye/AovevTOS, &fff/Lerifre Sri iv roioirry K\vda}vi avrbs %ets v(ravT$ riva vovv riyepoviKov, which may be a sublime defence, but isvery illogical.

""""DESTINY OF MAN S SPIRIT 209sense, preferred to speak of the pleasantness and thepeace of this loyalty. But the rejection of Eudgemonismimplies a fallacy and there is no doubt; that, roughlyspeaking, all systematizers of schemes of Duty areconvinced that Honesty is the best So thepolicy."cogency of the appeal,in favour of conduct devotedto the common good, remains independent, irrespectiveof the settlement of speculative questions. And thatof humanis well ;for upon this weightiest pointimmortality, Marcus makes no definite pronouncement :indeed, his testimony is more than impartial, it isalmost but not quite negative.9. In one of the very earliest passages on theSoul v. 32, we find its capacity for comprehendingeternal things and the beginning and the end rt?;ovv tyvyri ei/re^i/o?tc. eiricr 777/1,0)v ; who then is that("faithful and wise servant 1 eibvla") r) ap%r)vK. reXo?K. TOV Bi 0X779 T7J9 overLas SirjKovra Aoyov (the Reasonthat pervades all K. things) Sta iravros TOV alcovosKara Trepiobov? rerayfjievas ol/covojjLovvTa TO Hav.Nowit is the peculiar teaching of all Averroists," ancientand modern, that the human Soul is dignified with theknowledge of everlasting truth but that this constitutes;no argument for believing in the bestowal of an abidingconsciousness on the spirit so honoured. Sometimes allthe language of personal immortality is employed withunconscious ambiguity, merely to convey the fact thatSoul here has insight into abstract mathematical truth,and into (so-called) moral ideas. Constantly preoccupied with the thought of approaching death andthe vanity of human life, Marcus is continuallyreassuring himself that there is nothing terrible indissolution, as the debt of Nature, in harmony with14

"""210 MARCUS AURELIUSthe world s interest ;as it freshens itselfby alteringand rearranging atoms, and thus brings birth of newcreatures from the death of others. From this lawwhy should man alone claim exemption? v. 3 3 : TL ovven, rb evravOa Kare^ov ; sensibles and sense are unrealand fallacious : avrb 8e TO ^rv^apiov avaBv^iaa^ d(f>aifjiaros. Has he forgotten in this materialism thehigh affinity claimed for ?spirit or is this not toinclude the sublimer element set free by death ? ThemoralisTrepi/Aeveiv ^Xew rrjv eire afllaiv etre jACTdoraau(" serenely to await the end, be it extinction or transmutation").Death is the great leveller. vi. 24:(Alexander and his stable-boy on a par) rjroi, yap.v et? Tou? avrov? rov KOCT/JLOV o-Trep/jLariKovsrj 8t<TK8d<r0Tj<rai 6/40/0)9 et9 Ta$ GLTO/JLOVS: theStoic and the Epicurean account ;it is difficult to seewherein consists the superiority of first over second.So vii. 32 :Tlepl Oavdrov rj el C7e8a<7yu,o? aro/xot, el 3*eWcTi?, rjToi o-peVis rj fAerdo-Taais. vii. 50. After quotingwith approval Euripides Chrysippus,"Growth of earthreturns to earth ; ||Seeds that spring of heavenly birth ||To heavenly realms anon revert TOVTO 8taAi;crt9ev Ti9 arofjuots dvTefjL7r\otcwv, K. TOLOVTOS T^TWV aTradwv (TTOi^elcov ("dissolution of the atomiccombinations and consequent scattering of the impassiveelements"). Here Marcus is a complete Lucretianfor the nonce. vi. 28. Death ends not merely sensationand appetite, but is also avairavKa . . .SiavorjTiKris8tefo8of, where Kendall ssearchings of thoughtsuggests, perhaps, to a casual reader, rather the ceasingof anxiety than the extinction of conscious thoughtaltogether, which I take to be Marcus meaning.vii. 10. First let us note Marcus consistent dualism

"DESTINY OF MAN S SPIRIT 211of substrate and cause (evv\ov . . . cuTfwSe?, or as here,: Ildv TO evv\ov evafyavi^erai Ta^ara rfjTWVov(ria, K. nrcuv aiTiov els TOV TWV f O\cov Aoyova7ro\a^dveTai, and we cannot doubt that"is included in aina. (K. every cause is quickly:reassumed into the Universal viii.Keason.")25 :oerjaet rjTQi <7Ke8aa0T] va.i TO GvyKpl/ACiTLOV crov r) <r|3ea0f]i/aiTO Trvevfjuariov rj /jLeraa-rrjvat K. a\\a%ov Karara^Orivai,.("Either your mortal compound must be dispersedinto its Atoms, or else the breath of life must beextinguished, or be transmuted and enter a newxorder.")10. We may note that it is just possible to givea slightly more personal and hopeful meaning here,though, on the whole, I believe Dr. Kendall s translationgives the true sense transferred to another;command,and be set on duty in another iii, sphere." 3. Comparing life to a voyage, and marvelling at the reluctanceof passenger to disembark, although he has reached hisdestination ;rl Tavra ; eVe/3??? evrXeu 0*0,5 KaTtj^Oijs5K/3ijQi,. El IJLV e <f> Tepov PICK, ovSev 6e)v Kevov ovBeKt el be ev avaidOrjaia iravar) . . . dve^o/u-ez/o?K.\arpeiK0v. To this possible interpretation 58 lendsfsome countenance : O TOZ^ Odvarov fopovfjievos, r/TotavaidQ^cflav (fropeirai, rj ata6ij<Tiv erepoiav.A\\ elVeovfceri,, ovSe KCIKOV TWOS alcrdrjcrr) ("no pain in death,for it implies extinction of percipience,"the teachingof all the Dissolutionists) ; etVe d\\oiorepav alo-Qrjaiv1Cf. Herbert Spencer in his latest work, Facts and Comments :"What becomes of consciousness when it ends? We can only inferthat it is a specialized and individualized form of that Infinite andEternal Energy which transcends both our knowledge and our imagination ;and that at death its elements lapse into the Infinite and EternalEnergy whence theywere derived."

">z>ef"ravra"212 MARCUS AURELIUSa\\olov%<pov eery K. TOV %fiv ov Travcry. Thismay mean mere transmigration of the vital energy intoother animals bodies ;or itmay imply continuance ofthe consciousness.("If sensation ischanged in kind,you will be a changed creature, and will not cease toButlive.") thoughit is (with iii. 3) the most decidedpassage we have yet encountered, a survival of something in another phase of existence, we may certainlywonder that, with his peculiar theories, he chooses thelow word aicr6r)o-i<s to expressthat in man which risessuperior to death I will merely quoteix. 36: TO!TTvevpaTifcbv (?with Casaubon Trvevfjuarlov) d\\o TOIOV-TOV etc TOVTCOV et<?[jt,6Ta/3d\\ov: the vital orpneumatic current flits from body to body, quickeningnow one, now another of these congeries. That thewhole series of passages merely implies the indestructibility, as of matter, so of vital force, receives weightyconfirmation from our next. x. 7 : "Hrotyap oxeSaafAos&v o-vve/cplOrjv (so viii.25) fy rpoirT) TOV(TTepe/jiviov et? TO ^yewSe? TOV Se Trvev/AaTiicov (hereCasaubon is silent) efc TOae/>wSe$wo-Te K. TavTait sufferaKa\T]4>6Tji/ai et? TOV TOV o\ov Aoyov (whetherRagnarok at stated intervals or renew itsyouthwith perpetual change). He continues significantlyand in quite a modern spirit. E. : Do not regard thesolid or the pneumatic elements as a natal part ofbeing ; they are but accretions of yesterday or the daybefore, derived from food and respiration."Now clearlyin such a passage he says nothing about the roO? orthe Aai^wv (whether as identical or distinct). Perhapsvovs without this material envelope and vital currentto which it is strongly attached, loses all its definiteness,and sinks back, mere logical abstract truth, into the

""""""""DESTINY OF MAN S SPIRIT 213reservoir of Universal Mind, xi. 3 :for the soulready, when the war of dissolution comes (eav 77877d,TroXu0T]i/cu Serj TOV crco/xaro?), for extinction, or dispersal,or survival !(77x04 aj3eo-0TJmi 77 orK8ao-0Y)mt 77 Gvppeivai).xii. 1 :If, then, now that you near the end, leavingall else alone, you reverence only your Inner Self andthe G-od. within, if you will fear, not life sometimecoming to an end, but never beginninglife at all inaccord with Nature s Law," and (K. ^ TO iraveeadai,TTore TOV f)v (feo^rjO^, d\\a TO<ye /j,r}Se7roTe ap^aa-BaiKCLTO,(frvcrLv ??z/) a clear instance of the Kantianindifference of Moral Duty to speculative certitude,but without the comfort of the postulates.11. xii. 31. E. :"Whyhanker for continuousexistence ? (ri eVt^refc TO SiayiveaOat, /) Is it for sensation, desire, growth ? or, again, for speech, utterance,thought ? Which of these seems worth the craving ?(TI TOVTWV iroffov (701, a% LOV Soicel ;) If each and all ofthese are of small regard (ev/caTa^povijTa), address yourself to the final quest, the following of reason and ofGod." a\\a fjid^eTai TO TL^CLV TavTa, TO a^deadai el$i,a TOV TeOvrfKevat GTepr}o-eTcn, Ti? avTwv. To honourthese things of earth, and to repine because death deprivesus of them, is inconsistent with this true end of life. 1In conclusion, I come to two rather lengthier sections,in which the problem of souls is considered: iv. 21.He approaches a rather quaint and Scholasticdifficulty :If souls survive death, how is the airspacious enough to hold them from all eternity ?(elSia/jLevovaiv at ^frv^al KT\.). How," we reply, doesearth hold the bodies of generation after generation1Taura must refer to the list of human faculties and not to the Ao ^osand 6eos just before, even if the construction were grammatical.

"""""214 MARCUS AURELIUScommitted to the grave? Just as on earth, after acertain term of survival (irpos rivnva eTriSiafjiovrjv),change and dissolution of substance makes room forother dead bodies (fjLera/3o\rj K. SidXvcris) ; so, too, thesouls, transmuted into air after a period of survival,change by processes of diffusion and ignition, and areresumed into the seminal principle of the universe, andin this way make room for others to take up theirhabitation in their stead(et9 rov depa ^eOiaTa^evai. . . eVt TTOGOV aufAjjietkao-cH K. yu.eTa/3aXXou<7 ykowrai K.et? rov T&V f/ O\a)V arTrepfjuaTiKov Aoyovsurvival of.i, . . .Such isSouls,e<f>%ct)pav rat? Trpocr&vvoiKi^ofJievai,?the natural answer, assuming theviroOeaei,rov ra? i/ri^a? SiafxeVeii/."He is strictly impartial here, and settles with a logicalanswer a purely logicalconundrum ;but h may be notedthat even in the more favourablehypothesis,"as heterms it, the souls of the righteous only last a short time,and soon melt and dissolve into the Universal Keason ;here at least Marcus isAverroistic."plainly12. The final and by far the most important (andis it that thedisappointing) passage is xii. 5 : "Howgods, who ordered all things well and lovingly, overlooked this one thing: that some men elect in virtue(having kept close covenant with the divine, andenjoyed intimate communion therewith by holy actand sacred ministries) should not, when once dead,renew their being, but be utterly extinguished?(ITw?Trore irdvra /caXco? K. <f)i,\av6p(ji)7ra)s Starafaz/re?ol OeolTOVTO JJLOVOV TrapelSov, TO evlov? . . . real iravv xpqcrTovsK.rjr\el(TTa TrpbsTO Oelov wcnrep av^oXaia Oe/ievovs K.eirl Tr\el<TTov Si epycovocricov K. lepovpytwv avvrjOei,*; TO)

""From"Do"And""DESTINY OF MAN S SPIRIT 215i,aXX et? TO TravreXes aTreajSirjK^mt;)If,indeed,it be so, be sure, had it been better otherwise (erepwe%eiv eSei), the godswould have had it so. Were itright, it would be likewise possible. Were it accordingto nature, nature Would have broughtit to pass (el <yapv^ r)V av K. SuvaToy, K. el Kara (frvcriv, rfveytcev av$1/0-49. E/c Se TOV firj otm9 e%eiv, eiirep ofyOUTWS exi),its not being so, if as a fact it isnot so, be assured itought not so to be (Trio-TovcrOa)TO fj,rj Berjcrai KT\.). you not see that in hazarding such questions you arraign the justice of God(Si/eat 0X0777) 1 Nay, we could not thus reason with thegods but for their perfectness and justice" (OVK av 8Si\ey6fjLeda rot? $eot?, el f^rj apia TOi K.1. El Se TOVTO, OVK av rt, irepiel^ov a8t/tw? K. ar)ijLe\r)/j,evovTWV ev rfj SiaKoafjitjo-et,: from this itfollows that they never would have allowed any unjustor unreasonable neglect of parts of the great order."This isperhaps the most striking passage in the wholebook, and demands now some consideration.13. We must not press down Marcus to a dogmaticstatement;he isonly concerned to vindicate the Divinegoodness at all cost and under any condition or circumstance. Whatever my experience or discovery in lifemay be, it shall not interfere with this belief of mine,whether it be instinctive or a scholastic maxim, learntby heart at the beginning of my How career." noblyirrational is this prejudice in favour of a School thesis !There is no foundation for his belief except the formal1Implying, I suppose, that we are indebted to them (1) for the facultyof criticizing reason, by which we can ungratefully impeach the CosmicProcess ; (2) for their patience and long-suffering, by which they listenwithout anger to our murmurs.

"""""2i6MARCUS AURELIUSsyllogism of the Porch, by which you could prove anything and be none the wiser and; (here is the really redeeming feature) an unassailable personal convictionwhich has come to him in spite of the gloomy issue of hisphilosophic reflexion, that God is gracious."Here isreligious faith, very vague and very much entangled ina whole mass of pantheistic credenda," but sincere,authentic, vital. And, with the right instinct of theChristian, he will at once sacrifice God s almightinessto His goodness ; perhaps the gods could not recall aman from the gates of death." This is implicit in thecentral part of the section. So J. S. Mill willinglyabandons the more or less meaningless dogmaof infinitepower, because thereby he arouses the strongest emotion,the most redoubtable propaganda in the world of men,the spirit of chivalrous loyalty to a cause not yet won.are but theOr, again, we may suppose that the godssubordinate ministers and satellites of the Timceus, andthat Nature antecedes their loving providence by astern fiat separating the possible from the impossible.Whichever itmay be, Marcus clearly feels himself safein the hands of the higher powers. His reasoningisabsurd to the last degree ;not a single important word inthe paragraph could retain its customarysense if he isallowed to argue in that stiff and formal manner ; everydefinition evaporates into thin air. But who are we, tojudge another man s faith, or penetrate into the sacredrecesses of the inner ?temple Suffice it that in thislast great trial Marcus was tested in the furnace ofGod s abandonment, and was not found wanting ;sounshaken was his belief, so triumphant his heart andcharacter over the coldness, the inadequacy, of hisphilosophic creed.

"""""""DESTINY OF MAN S SPIRIT 217(E) BELIEF IN IMMORTALITY ESSENTIAL TO THE LOGICALTHEORY, IF NOT TO THE PURSUIT, OF MORALITYANALYSIS14. He preaches the very reverse of a current belief to-day, "immortality without Religionproof of Thanatism.; incalculable effect of a scientific15. To-day, for half the human race, there is no God,questionable belief in survival (on this moralitybased, not on a barren Theism).but uncan be14. But there is another and still more interestingquestion that this section raises. Marcus contemplateswith calmness, KELIGION WITHOUT IMMORTALITY." Today there is some prospect of the exact reverse,IMMORTALITY WITHOUT RELIGION." l So completelyhas the standpoint changed! A belief in the survivalof the conscious spirit is, I believe, absolutely essential,if not to the practice, at least to the reasonable pursuitof morality. Morality in the main is instinctive, anddepends very little on ethical teaching ; indeed, theethical teacher feels himself always stepping on the thinice of the sceptical inquiry, Why must I do right ? orthe volcanic fires of passionate anarchy. But I readily1Dr. Kendall has a very interesting sentence, cvii., on MarcusThanatism, though, as I have explained, I cannot recognise the parallel ;cvii. : Just as the devout Christian will in his self-communings face themoral corollaries consequent on a denial of the Resurrection or of afuture life ; so, too, Marcus will entertain and test the consequences ofpostulates to which he himself gives no assent." It seems clear that inthe second case (though not necessarily in the former) the word "moralwould cease to bear its Kantian sense. It would either imply anarbitrary law of a tyrant who had called us from animalism to tease andtantalize us with illusions and pains or the convention of;society, whichmight or might not remain binding in practice, though in theory itwould be indefensible, in the complete absence of any standard whichcould measure human life and its hopes and self-devotion.

"2i8MARCUS AURELIUSallow that moralityisindependent of a belief in apersonal Creator and Judge. Moral behaviour, whichresists the solvent of atheism, 1 could not possibly con-1 How completely independent the moral sanction is in Marcus eyeof any theological presupposition, is seen in vi. 44 : W per o$v 4pov\ctiffavroTrepl fj(,ov K. rdov fyol <rvfjif3ijvai ocpeiXdvTtov (particular Providence)KO.XUS efiovXevaavTo. It is not easy, even for a moment, to imagine agod to be tf/SouXos, and for what cause should they want to harm me ? . . .But if their providence was not special, but general, all follows in theunbending course of things, and I must be content (dcnrde<r6a.i K. arepyeivBut there is 6(j>el\(t)).yet a third possibility, the Epicurean hypothesis,ei 5 &pa Trepl [Aydevos fiovXevdyrai (inffTetieLv fj.ev ov% oaiov). R. :indeed, they take no thought for anything at all, an impious creed,then let us have done with sacrifice and prayer and oaths and all otherobservances by which we own the presence and the nearness of the gods(ws Trpbs Trapovras K. ffv/mfiiovvTas TOVS #eoi$s, going in and out amongstus). But if, after all, they take no thought for any concern of ours,then is man thrown back upon himself ; e^ol fj.ev e^ecm. Trepl ^ucturoO(3ov\eve(r6ai e^ol 5 &rrt cr/c^ts Trepl rov <rv/j.<ptpoi>ros (which, of course, isinterpreted in wider sense the weal of smaller or greater commonwealth,promoted by social activity and religious quietism). x. 6. Eire &TO/J,OIetre Qvais, irp&rov xelvdu ori fitpos dfii rov "OXou virb 0tfcrews dioiKovfjLe ov itTreira 6rt ^%w TTCOS ot/cetws Trpbs ra :6/j.oyefTJ fiepf). (R."Be the wordatoms, or be it nature s growth, stand assured, first, that I am a part ofthe whole at nature s disposition (?) ; secondly, that I am related to allmy kindred parts.") Certainly 0tfo-ews is odd ;an alternative is propounded, and its solution pronounced immaterial, or at least subsequentand secondary to certain immovable axioms ;and yet, on closer survey,we find these reposing upon acceptance of one. hypothesis (as in theThecetetus, where the very word under discussion creeps stealthilyinto its own definition !). Nor does the suggestion Stoi/coifycei os help usmuch, though clearly a man might recognise a sort of purpose or end inhis own nature, while refusing to see in the world without anything butthe play of accidental and unconscious forces. Marcus is not one ofsuch dualists; in the reason within he sees irrefragable testimony tothe ordering mind ivithout, though he carefully fortifies himself againstthe other contingency. For ethics must be absolutely emancipated frompresupposition, must depend solely on a man s consciousness, sense ofthe fitting, artistic proportion (as in so much of Hellenic morality),exhaustion of all other remedies for the restlessness and pangs of lifeiroaa Tr\wr)0eis !).*If,

DESTINY OF MAN S SPIRIT 219front the certainty of dissolution. The whole attitudeto life would be so transformed that a new series ofeudsemonistic maxims or suicidal appealswould arise tomeet this moral certainty, that man was an animalwho had gone astray from Eden, cursed with the lastterrible imprecation of a secret but malignant power,in a word, rational ;that faculty in us which halves ourpleasures and doubles our pains. The civic code ofrespectable convention and reciprocity would strugglein vain against this conviction ;and fanaticism or superstition alone could reconstruct the shattered fabric ofsociety, or mount guard over the security of the weakand the rights of private property. Nay, the popularvoice, always on the side of conservatism and approvedfriends, might rise in angry and indignant clamouragainst those shorteners of life as they dealt their hopea deathblow. A tumult followed the elimination of elevendays ;what might we not expect to be the fate of thescientist who could disprove beyond a doubt the survivalof the Soul ?15. But here is the point of interest : this is quiteunlikely, regarding the matter in historic probability.The signs of the times, the arguments of the wise, theeager curiosity of society, are all telling the other way.The massive weight of cumulative democratic testimonyisheavy in the balance ; for nearlyhalf the human racethere is no God, but the soul is indestructible, creatingits own recompense, passing verdict on itself, shapingitsunending destiny. It is quite conceivable that man sSoul may be immortal, but that there is no power inthe universe (beyond the unknown and unconsciousground) to which the name of God and the attributesof religious worship can apply. A Society founded on

220 MARCUS AURELIUSthe one hypothesis we see in the Buddhistic communityof sympathy and compassion, by no means nihilistic orunethical ;there isnothing in such tenets to countenance rebellion or the overthrow of the moral law. Buta Society founded on the sense of the unreality of whatwe term Soul, the illusion of personality, is not onlyinconceivable, it is contrary to the experience of allhuman history. Marcus did not think so : but he wroteto comfort himself ;he could not have expected thathis arguments could appeal as rational or sober to anyof his contemporaries, or to the average man. Hissubjective resignation comes of strongest faith, whichhis intellectual scepticism cannot overthrow.APPENDIXANALYSISA. No definite pronouncement or even unmistakable tendency ; onlyconcerned to show morals is indifferent to such speculations.wavers betweenB. No metaphysiC) only a doglike fidelity to Duty (hephysical fatalism and religion).C. No doubt his ultimate personal hope;"the soul released wouldrejoin the gods."A. I cannot, I fear, entirely assent to Dr. Kendall s interpretation of the Emperor s views on Immortality, which is theultimate problem. To me he is not the dogmatist in scienceor theology which his translator believes. The sometimesinterminable series of "seu" or "sive" in Roman poets, theheaping-up of possible explanations of phenomena (such asthe Nile s rising), without giving any view or opinion priority,seems to point to a wholesome suspension of judgment thus

"""DESTINY OF MAN S SPIRIT 221prevalent, and to find its counterpart in the rjroi aro/xot 17KoV/xos, which recurs so often in these commentaries with itspendant etre o-/3e <ris etre //-erao-racm. I quite agree that"death, wherever he has occasion to give clear and simpleutterance to his own thoughts, is always a dissolution of being,that is the end of action, impulse, will, or thought, thatterminates every human activity and bounds our brief spanof life with an Eternity that contains neither hint nor hopenor dread of further conscious being,"ii.11, 12, ix. 21,x. 29, xii. 35, with the single reserve that "isahvays"read, "is represented in many passages. I will also grantthat (1) the Stoic system with its odd and disconnectedindividualism is strangely silent on this topic ; (2) that Marcushimself, with all his contempt of life and the exceedingfutility and barren domain conferred on the Soul, is, likemany mystics and most Asiatics, indifferent to continuedbeing. But I do not think a definite and dogmatic pronouncement can be elicited from a comparison of passages.I could never endorse statements so sweeping as ": His own"belief is that death ends sensation," cvii. In his own conviction Marcus nowhere seems to waver," cvi. The denialof the hope of immortality is settled and complete," cix.His attitude to Atomism or to the future state of the Soulis sound and coherent," cv. For let us apply the same canonto the constant hypothesis of alternative KVKCWV rj KOO-/XOS as tothe o-/3eW r] /^erao-rao-is.Kendall believes that the belief inan Ordered Universe is absolute ; though Marcus often playswith the opposite theory, and points it to show that it isindifferent in its effect on morals. If so, the cr/^Vis mayequally (as the most emphatic declaration of Thanatism) represent a possibility which he nevertheless regardsiswith nofavour; and //.erao-rao-is,as I have pointed out, may quiteconceivably imply a new sphere of activity, a new rearrangement, a new part. But my own view is that both these arein the same category; they are really alternatives in both

"Now""222 MARCUS AURELIUScases. His whole concern is to show the independence andautonomy of the moral judgment. His scientific or dogmaticknowledge is always cast in this sceptical form. He quitesufficiently guards himself from any definite decision.B. To use the word "conviction" in any context but themoral sense, is misleading. By all means, his predilection isfor an ordered world, the existence of gods, even their providential care, if not of particular, at least of general laws ;and"for a Soul, a reassumption into that reservoir of Soul-life(abelief which we connect with the term Averroism").But he certainly will not dogmatize jhe has passed throughand abandoned the phase of eager science ;he grasps in hisintellectual survey not the uses but the vanity of things ;their incredible meanness when analysed into their elements ;hisis moral and reacts on self, not scientific and<f>vcrioXoyiaobjective. He has in effect no metaphysic ; only a dog-likeallegiance to this inward sense of duty, which has spoilt hislife, setting him on a peak of loneliness aloof from earthlypleasures and amiable illusions, away from his fellow-men.And those one day, gathering round his dying bed, will say,we have got rid at last of our "pedagogue He does!not see that his indifference to such questions (ifit was notassumed), his emphasis on the good will alone being unreservedly good," places him for the ordinary man in aposition utterly illogical. Why this unswerving loyalty toa principle? The "finaltriumph of the right," or any "faroffdivine event," are meaningless phrases to this apostle ofthe "Eternal Now." I quite admit the instinctive courageand self-devotion of a martyr to a cause, say, the regeneration of mankind through Nihilism,"in sure and certain hope,"as Tourguenieff so pathetically describes, of personal ruinhere and extinction hereafter. But idealism (as emotion anda wager of hardihood or defiance)will do wonders in reinforcing the moral instinct (as the craving for martyrdom) ;"and Marcus had no trace of this. The good soul may very

""DESTINY OF MAN S SPIRIT 223likely vanish and be as if it never had been. (ov8ay/,ov 17oTrovSrj, the invariable loophole of evasion.) And there is nocause at all in the world for men to fight for ; everything isat once divine, monotonous, and predestined before all theages : to struggle is impious in the theologic, useless in thescientific sphere. There remain passages," says Dr. Kendall,"in which other views are broached, and which some haveinterpreted as a wavering back on hope, inconsistent with hisphilosophic creed." To my eyes this is precisely the significantfeature of the book ;the contest between this religious andthis materialistic or fatalistic conception of the Universe.(7. His profound belief in Divine interposition in the livesof individuals (seei.17, "help vouchsafed by dreams") isnot only clearly stated in the commentaries, once or twice,but is corroborated in all his correspondence with Fronto.He uses it sparingly here, because his mind wants reinforcingagainst the doubts and suspicion of the world and its goodness,creeping in through the "jointsof his Stoical harness,"which assuredly he seems sometimes not "to have proved."His real weapons, his few pebbles for slaying giant Despair,certainly come from no intellectual armoury, but from theearly training, the immovable conviction and insight of aloving and sympathetic nature, great in spite of his creed. Iconceive that ultimately Marcus believed that the soul of thewise joined the gods, whatever meaning he attached to thisexpression. Christians to-day recognize the extreme hazardof defining a future life; some desire eternal rest; somecontinued work, to be "ruler over ten cities,"or to "siton thrones judgingthe twelve tribes of Israel(perhaps a majority of the human race) look upontinction of consciousness as a final blessing, too great;othersthe exto behastily grasped, but to be patiently won through repeatedpangs of rebirth. It is inconceivable that Marcus could havebelieved the Ruling Principle, the Inner Self, the God Within,to disperse into thin air. On what could he found the

""224 MARCUS AURELIUSof man to the beast ? Ifsuperiority this colourless absorptioninto Mind again seems but a poor travesty of an immortalhope, let us at least not find fault with Marcus. He believedthe soul returned to God who gaveit and not one of us;to-day can say more. "He whom the gods lent us, hasrejoined the gods."

CHAPTEK VTHE UNIVERSE, ETERNAL AND DIVINE, ANDTRANSIENT AND CONTEMPTIBLE(A) THE PEKPETUAL FLUX AND MONOTONY OF THEWORLD-PROCESSANALYSIS1. Hard to reconcile his devotion to God, and his hate or scornof the universe which embodies Him (how can whole be goodwhen parts contemptible ?).2. The One Imperishable Nature, both transient and ever thesame ;dignity and vanity of the world.3. His manifold titles (does it betray vacillation from personalprovidence to scientific fatalism ?).4. Texts on the fleeting yet monotonous character of the CosmicProcess.1. DIFFICULT as it is to sever the objective scienceof Marcus from the subjective survey of his own nature(for the former is but the reflex of the latter), we mustnevertheless attempt now to examine with dispassionatedetachment his views on the Universe and the Sourceof Being. We see that Marcus, in common with thegreater number of speculators in the second century, isat heart a Gnostic. He is only saved by his otiose andtheoretical Monism from the conclusion of St. JohnJohn v. 19 :l^a^iev Be OTI etc rov Seov K.eVyu,ez>(1 O

"""226 MARCUS AURELIUS6 /eooy-to? 0X09 ev T<UTrovypto Kelrat,) and his reverencefor the divine spark, and his depreciation ofhuman lifeand nature are distinctly Basilidian or Valentinian,fundamentally dualistic. As with man s soul, aliensojourner in a contemptible framework of corruption,so with the Supreme Power. It is hard to reconcilethe praise of God with the scorn of the visible Universewhich embodies Him. In what part of the world, inwhat corner of Nature can He reside, where all ispitiable or disgusting Has 1 he a foothold any moresecure in the realm of History or Time ? Marcus contempt of Time is perhaps even more striking than hisdislike of Matter : and yet, by the very terms of hishypothesis, God reigns supreme in both departments,and is so far from merely guiding or superintending asomewhat stubborn and indocile complex,is substantially identical with it. Marcus Aurelius is notthe first philosopher who has thrown the black cloak ofMonism over a militant and meaningless array of particulars. The Canonists of mediaeval times when egoismwas rampant unrestrained, and central authority ornational cohesion unknown, elevate the pretensions ofthe universal sovereign of the Christian Republic,Pope or Emperor and the; grandeur of their attributesvaries in exact proportion to the inefficiency of theircontrol. A pessimistic disillusion with each fragmentof life and its ideals, love, ambition, knowledge seemsto lead surely to an unwarrantable deification of thewhole ;the illusion of Sorites in which at a certainpoint the sum of despised particulars becomes somehowDivine. Nothingis more remarkable than the courseof that School, which, beginning with rejection of theWill-to-live," culminates in the mystical resignation

""THE UNIVERSE 227of Von Hartmann. Pietism, like the sympatheticinstinct at the root of practical morality, isdeeplyengrained in the heart while the obvious; folly ofrebellion lends the sanction of utility and personalinterest to the creed of acquiescence. Ducuntvolentem fata nolentem trahunt."Only in undisciplined Eussia, 1 borderland of the entranced East andthe stirring West, are there signs in exceptional natures ofa final and reasoned rebellion against the Universal order2. Now Marcus iseloquent alike on the majestyof God and the triviality of the Creature, in the doubledomain of Time and Space, History and Nature.He enlarges impartially on the transience and thesameness of the imperishable nature. He adopts without hesitation the axiom of the early lonians, that thewhole process leads to nothing, and is but the ceaselessarrangement, combination, and rearrangement of anoriginal and unchanging substrate. With modernscience he clearly recognizes that matter is indestructible, and that ingredients, whether atoms or someother primordial unit, after performing their duty inone body pass on to other posts. We have nothing butHeraclitus again with his doctrine of the flux of thingsand the Logos, all pervading, alone the real ; only tingedwith a deeper sadness, an intenser thoughstill re-1We may perhaps here note the extraordinary resemblance of Tolstoito Marcus Aurelius.Whether it be insistence on moral duty, toleranceof evil, ascetic contempt of human love in all its forms, an utterinability to understand logic or follow an argument, strange and fascinated disgust of the petty details of life, Marcus is but a Tolstoienthroned, Tolstoi a restatement of the inspired pessimist. To thelatter, all forms of legitimate affection are Trapa yet the sexual;instinct is the tyrant and torturer of the young.<f>t<nvNot for that reasondoes he impugn the order of things, nor examine more closely into theredoubtable difficulty of denningNature."

"228 MARCUS AURELIUSstrained sympathy with the human, hands groping,spite of the dogmatism of the Schools, after a closerand personal relation with the source of all (el apa ye-^rj\a(j)ijcret,av avTov K. evpoiev). The vanity of thingsis the perpetual theme of Marcus ;but we shall attemptin the following co-ordination of his fragmentary anddetached aphorisms to display how complexdoctrine, how irreconcilable its parts.is his3. The many titles given to this ultimate Beingshow how confused the Emperor becomes when askedto define ;he varies between the extreme limits ofdevotion to a personal God (Zevs) and the mostabstract scientific Irnpersonalism. It is TO yevvwvTrdvTa %a)ov, 6 yevvrjaas #007x09, 7roXt9 K. 7ro\ireia rjTrpea-fivrdrrj, TroXt? Jto9, 0eo9, Oeol, #007x09 (simply),Xoiyo? generally or with addition Xoryo90X09 #007x09, 0X77 ova-la, TO oXoi>,TO, oXa,or -77,TO a-vyfcXcoOofjievov, dvayrcrj, TO(expressing itself in olKeiorrjs Oav^aaia,vfjL/JLrjpvo-w, a-vvvrjais, crvvSecri,? iepa),andeither absolutely or with Kolvr), rjrwv o\cov orO o\ov $uo~t9, TITWV Oewv Trpovoia, (rvy/c\a)cri$ K.TWV Trpovola SioiKov/jievcov, Xo<yo?6 ra oXav, rjTrdvTcov Trrjyrj, rjrd oXa Siot/covaa fyvais, TIAtria, TO T6\et,ov wov, TO dyaObvK. Slicaiov K.Ka\ov, TO yevv&v iravra K. crvve-^ov K. Trepie^ov K.\d/A/3avov StaXuo/xe^a t? yevecriv erepcovTrdvra Sioovcra K. dTroXafiftdvovcra <&von,s, TO TOVov, rjTOV 6\ov Sidvoia, TO amwSe?. It is not1"Where we wonder vaguely how goodness and justicehave creptin as qualifications or attributes of this reservoir of physical life !Has he forgotten the wise antithesis of vi. 17 : r&v<j)opai ffTOLxeiw and

"""THE UNIVERSE 229permissible to see gradations or stages of divinity ; forthe whole hypothesis is that God and the world areone, and that there is but a single cause. At the sametime, Marcus (as in his psychology) is betrayed frequently into popular language. He sees visible gods inthe firmament ;he recognizes his individual Mentorwithin as the gift of Zeus ;and he sometimes appearsto contemplate, with the possibility of Atomism, aPlatonic recession of the Highest from a world whichis not now in direct relation to Him, but followsblindly an immutable sequence. This universe (likeSpinoza s God with his two attributes, Thought andextension !), though one and integral as the Parmenideansphere, tends in reflexion to divide into amwSe? andv\iicov ;and we need scarcely add that, like man sspirit in his body, the higher principle tends to set itselfin opposition to the lower, and in the last resort toclaim complete freedom in Transcendentalism. Individuals in particular are passing soon and littleworth the reality underlyingis the A6<yos aTreppa-;TIKOS which requires consummate powers of analysis tobe distinguished from the Platonic Idea.The sum of the world isunchanging, and is alwaysnew and fresh because of the perpetual shifting of theparts. 1 It is thus a single living being in which each1Wordsworth s "Excursion"The monitor express dMysterious union with its native sea.Even such a shell the universe itselfIs to the ear of faith ;and there are times,I doubt not, when to you it doth impartAuthentic tidings of invisible things ;Of ebb and flow, and ever-during power ;And central peace, subsisting at the heartOf endless agitation."

""""230 MARCUS AURELIUSpart as leaf on tree depends upon the whole and takesitsmeaning and its sustenance from this close connexion. To stand aloof and claim independent beingis a gross sin, though unhappily (and incomprehensibly)it is possible to man, alone of living creatures. But itis needless and tedious to multiply these obvious corollaries from the Pantheistic hypothesis ; they are deducedby a sovereign logic, common to all minds and all ages.11For example, Emerson is a more genial Marcus Antoninus, and alittle but interesting book (the Zeit Geist, by L. Dougall) seems torepresent on Canadian soil the same peculiar features of American"Transcendentalism and Roman Stoicism. In all, there is a significant family likeness quite free from any conscious imitation. CompareBartholomew Toyners new vision of the Divine Nature : He laughedwithin himself as he thought what a strange childish notion he hadhad . . . that God was only a part of things that he, Bart. Toyner,;could turn away from good that God;spower was only with him whenhe supposed himself to be obedient to Him ! . . . With the children andmaidens there were pleasure and hope with the older men and women;there were effort and failure, sin and despair. The life that was in allof them, was it partly of God and partly of themselves He ? laughedagain at the question. The life that was in them all, was all of God,every impulse, every act. His father . . . s cruelty, the irritable selflove,the incapacity to recognize any form of life but his own, it was ofGod, not a high manifestation the bat is lower than the bird, and:yet it is of God. . . . He saw that the whole of the Universe goes todevelop character (Marcus was not so anthropocentric and the one!),chief heavenly food set within reach of the growing character for itsnourishment is the opportunity to embrace malice with love, to gatherit in the arms of patience, convert its shame into glory by willingendurance. . . .Man, rising from the mere dominion of physical law(which works out its own obedience) into the Moral Region where aperpetual choice is ordained of God, and the consequences of eachchoice ordained. . . .Nothing is ever outside of Him ;what happensafter we have done a thing is just what must happen ... so that wecan never hope to escape the good and evil of what we have done ;forthe way things must happen is just God s character that never changes.You see the reason we can choose between right and wrong, when a treecan t or a beast, is just because God s power of choice is in us and not in

<pT<* aurdK.THE UNIVERSE 231It only remains to give illustrations of these tenets inthe Emperor s own language, and to inquire if anysystem coherent and compatible with the postulate ofresponsible moral action can be therefrom derived.4. The world as fleeting and yet monotonous. ii.1 2 : 7r9 Trdvra ra^eeo? evafavl^erai,TO>/coa/jLO)avr&ra crMfjiara. . . TTCO? eureXTj K. evKara(f)p6vr)Ta K. pwrrapaK.ev^Oapra K. yeicpa (this discovery is the part of voepaSvvafjiis, thereby set in dualism over against a visiblewhich it despises and cannot control).ii. 1 4 : KavTpia%i \.ia cry piaxrea-Qai /AeXXr;?, etc. . . . Trdvra egdlBlov ojxoeiSf) K. dva rev K:\oviJL6va, K. ovSev Siatyepei7TOTpov ev etcarbv ereonv evrj BiaKoaiois rjev TWaTrelpa) XP vrt9 o^erai. (This indifference toTime or progress is an infallible sign of Mysticism.)The famous (iv. 3) o /cocr/io? aXXotcocrt? o /3/05which somehow loses its tone of despondencyOv$ev ovrw (f)i\el f)rcov ( O\wv73-0X77-^9,in translation. iv. 36 :ra ovra ^6ra/3d\\eLV K. Troieiv via Ofioia.43 :ZTorafto? rt? e TWV /c ^ivo^ievwv K. peujuia filaiov 6$u<7t? ft>? TOAla)v. v. 10 :EvTOLOVTU* ovvo<t>wpuirw K. rocravrrjpuaei rrjs T ovaias K, rov ^povov K. Trjs Kivrjcreats K.("I can imagine nothing that dethem.. . .Something of the secret of all peace the Eternal Nowremained with him as long as the weakness of the injury remained. . . .His mind was still animated with the conception of God as suffering inthe human struggle, but as the absolute Lord of the struggle ;and theconsequent belief that nothing but obedience to the lower motive canbe called evil." When returning health forced him to descend fromthis lofty air :came"the soul -bewildering difficulty of believing thatthe God of physical law can also be the God of promise ; that He thatis within us and beneath us can also be above us with power to lift usup. ... No one had told him about the Pantheism which obliteratesmoral distinctions, or told him of the subjective ideal which sweepsaside material delights."

""del232 MARCUS AURELIUSserves high prizing or intentpursuit").v. 23:7roXXa/a? evOvfjLov TO -rd\o<s rr)<$7rapa<f)opds K. vTre^aycoyrjsr&v ovrcov K. yivouevcov ("sweep past and disappear ")f/H re yap ovaia olov Troraabs ev SiyveKei pu<mavve^eo-i uera/3o\al<; . . .<r%e$ovovSev ecrrw?, and. . .thecustomary moral of absolute indifference and contempt.vi. 4 : Havra TO, vrroKei^eva rd%io~ra /ATa/3aXe, K.rjroi dva@vui,a6ijo~erai, (elirep rjvwrai 77 ovo-ia) rj o~/cebao--6r)o~erai (in no case any abiding connexion or symTa aev o-7revoei, <yivea6aira e o-TrevBeipathy). 15 :yeyovevai (impatient to come to the birth, as others toohave done)K. rov ywofjievov 8e TJSijn dir&r|3T)* puo-etsK. a\X.otco(7et9 avaveovo~i rov KOO-/JLOV Sirjvefcws, wo~7repTOV aireipov alwva rjTOV ftpovov aSiaXetTrro? veovcfropaael Trape^erai.ev Brj TOVTO) Trord/jia) ri av Tt? TOVTCOVro)v TrapaOeovrcov etcTi/uLTjcreiev ; (Is it not as foolish assetting one s love on some sparrow that flits past andin an instant is out of sight? vi. 46 :")wcrTrep wpocritrraraio~oi (as itsuch like places,ft>9occurs to you) ra ev rw a^16 ear pw andra avra op^^evaK. rb o/jioeio esirpoo-Kopr) rrjv 0eai/ rroiel (monotony of tedious repetitionmakes the spectacle pall ")rovro K. eVt 6\ov rov fiiovrcdcyeiv rrdvra dvu>yap Kara ra aurd K. e/c rwv avrwv.fMe%pt, rlvos ovv ; (almost a prayer, "0 Lord, how long?").vi. 59 : cosra^O)9 o Alcbv rrdvra KaXv^frei.vii. 1 :OXo)9 dvci) Kara TCI aura . . . ov&ev Kaivbv, rrdvra K.avvijOr) K. oXiyoxpovia. 10 : rravrbs uvij/jirj rdyiaraTO>eytcara%(t)vvvrai,alwvi. 18 ri :yap Svvarat %w/ot9fxcTaj3o\T]s yeveo~0ai ; ri $e <f)i\repov rj olfceiorepov rfjrcov 6\cov 3>vo~ei,; vii. 25: rcav& od opds oo~ov OVTTCOjxerapaXet ra o\a77SioiKovaa $u<rt9,K. d\\a e/c rfjsoverlap avrwv rroirjo-ei, etc. iva del j eapos $ o KOO~IJLO<S(like a thrifty housewife who has no further stock

"""THE UNIVERSE 233to draw upon, turns and adapts the old material).Similarly, viii. 50 :d\\a TO 6avp,ao~Tov rfs Te^vrjs. . . on77TWV o\a>vAverts ovBevefo> e^etTrepiopiaaaaeavTijv Trdv TO evBov (Bia(j)0eipea-6ai K.yripdcrKew K.a%pr}CTTov elvai, Bo/covv) els eavrrjv jfxeTajiJaXXci, K. on,Tfd\iv d\\a keapa etc TOVTCOV Troiel. . . .dp/ccirai ovvK.Tc^vrj T7j IBia. (Here... AC.x<0pa V\TJ ... AC.Nature personified as conscious artist, and as examplarto Sage of self-sufficingness.) vii. 49 :O/j,oeiBfj yap(TravTws ecrrai (namely, future will be exactly like thepast ; compare Leopardi s dialogue about the New/c.ov% olov re e/c(3f)vai, rov pvOpov rwv vvvAlmanac")yivo/jieixDv (whence it is the same to chronicle for fortyor ten thousand years). Tl yap tr\eov otyei ; viii. 6 :(H TWV 6\a)v $V<TI,S TOVTO epyov ^ei, ra c58e ovra e/celfjLeraTiOevai jjicTapaXXeiv alpeiv evdev K. efcelfyepeiv.Trdvra rpotral . . . Travra a-wtjOrj. ix. 19 : Hdvraev jiTaj3oXf] K. avrbs o~v ev b^veKeld\\ot(t)crei K. /cardTL (j)0opa K. 6 Kooy/,0? Be 0X09. (Strictly this is untrue,corruption has no meaning in relation to the Cosmos,whose sum remains always the same.) ix. 28 : Taurde. Ta TOV Koajjiov eytcv/cXia avw /caret)ef aianros elsalwva. 29 :Xcifjuappous 77TWV o\(0v atria TrdvTa c^eoet.28 (iter):"Hor) Tcdvras ^/-ta? 77 yrj Ka\ityei eVetraK. avTr) fAerapaXet* Katcelva els aTreipov fjieTa{3a\e1 K.Trdktv efcelva els tiTreipov. Tas yap eTrucv/jMTwO eis TCOVfjLeTa/3o\wv K. d\\otcoo-ea)s evOvfjiovfJuevos TLS K. TO T^XOSTravTos 6vr]Tov /caTa<f)pov?]crei. ("The billows of changeand variation roll apace and he who ponders them;will feel contempt for all things mortal. The UniversalCause is like a winter torrent ;itsweepsE.) ix. 35 :all before it."(j*eraf3o\ij) TOVTW Be ^aipei f) TWV o\a)v$ucrt,s KaO rjv TrdvTa /ca\cos yiveTat, K. et; aloovos 6jjioeiSws

""""234 MARCUS AURELIUSeyiveTo, K. els aireipov ToiavO* erepa carat. (Hebetrays an unhellenic passion for everlasting," infinite,"and from the permanence of Aristotle s limitedglobular system reverts to the perpetual series ofcorruptible universes scattered in infinite, in whichIonia anticipated modern science not solely in evolutionbut in astronomy.) x. 1 1 : U&)9 et? d\\rj\a TrdvrajierapdXXei . . . ^irjveKW^ TTpocre^e . . . fj,eya\o(f)poo~vvr)<;TroLTjTtKov (but we may be allowed to wonder whycontemplation of the ignoble destiny of Caesar s dustshould elevate the mind ! This dwelling on the sordidside of Materialism is not the way to encourageSpiritualism.) x. 27 :Swe^co?eirivoelv TTCO? iravra,ToiavTa oTroia vvv yiveTaiK.irpoo-Qev eylvero. xi. 1.In an eloquent passage on the powers of the RationalK. . . .TTJV nrepio^iKrjvSoul. Ere Be TrepiepxeTcu TOV 6\ov Koafjuov K. TO TreplavTov Kevov K. TO o-^Tj/juaavTovTraXiyyevea-iav Twv 6\wvjA7repi\aiji/3dvei, (" encompassesand comprehends the cyclic regeneration of the Universe")K. ; Trepivoel K. Oecopel OTL ovbev veurepov otyovTai,01 fjieO rj/uiasov&e irepiTTOTepov elSov 01 irpo rjp&V d\\aTpoTTov Tiva 6 . . .TeGaapaKOVTovTrjS iravTa TCL yeyovoTaK. TO, ecro/jieva ecopafceKCLTO, TO o^oetSe? our fathers had("no fuller vision, nor will our children behold any newxii. 2 1 : Mer ov TTO\V ovSel? ovSafAov ear)thing ").ovoe TOVTWV TL a vvv /^Xevm? ovSe TOVTCOV TWV vvvAnravTO,"jap fierapdXXen K. TpeTrecrOai K.ivaTrecfivfcev, eTepa e</>e^9 ylvqrai (thoughas he warns us, xi. 34 : TravTa fxtrapoXal OVK et? TO pr)ov ttXX et9 TO vvv fir) ov).xii. 23. Nature strikesthe hour for death ; rjTCOV o\cov ... ^9 TCOVfjLcrapaXXoi TWK, yeapos del K. cuKfJuaio^ o arv/jiTras8iafj,evei,.24 : 6Va/a9 civ et;ap6fj$,TauTa o^fret TO

"""="""THE UNIVERSE 235TO oXiyoxp^iof. 26: (E7T6\d6ov)ywdjjLevov OVTCOS ael eyivero K.ryevrjo-eTat,TOV OTI irav TOK. vvv rravTa-%ov ryiveTcu. The central idea iseasy to understand ;rejuvenescence through never - ceasing change the;Universe stationary in its total, flickering and kaleidoscopic in its parts. (Upon these conceptions, purelyphysical as they are, we must feel surprise when anidea of purpose, justice, or love issuperinduced.)(B) CREATION AND PROVIDENCE, HOW FARINTELLIGIBLE ?ANALYSIS5. Problem : is all predestined, or is there room for God s specialinterest and intervention ? (will not commit himself).6. Everywhere traces of conflict between scientific and religiousinterpretation ;inclines to belief in Providential government, but leaves morals unaffected by these questions.5. As to the question ofCreation in Time,"andthe cessation of a Providential government,there aretwo interesting passages, which prove how muchinclined Marcus was to cast his hypothesis into (H theform of a Sceptical alternative." vii. 75: TOVo\ov 3>vai<$ eVt rrjv Koo-^oirouav wp^Y)ae (the onceupon a time of fairy stories : once the impulseof Nature" advanced nimbly to the task of worldbuilding).Nvv Se rJTOt Trav TO ^ivojJievov/car eTraico-\ov0ija-iv ryiverat, all that now(" happens follows inthe train of consequence fatally),tc. rj aXoyia-ra ra/cvpiwTara e. eft a iroielrai ISlav oppty TO TOU KOG/JLOVelse you must deny reason to the sovereignHye/jiovitcbv ;ends which guide the impulse of the World-Soul. Suchis Dr. Kendall s translation ;but itputs a dilemma

""""236 MARCUS AURELIUSinstead of the sceptical alternative which seems to melurking in this difficult passage. Now ix. 28 givesmuch the same language, and it is worth while tocompare the sense : "Hroi, e< e/cao-rov OPJAO, rjrov 6\ovAicuvoia oirepel e.cr/roSe^ouTO eiceiv7)sra Be XotTra /car*H a7ra wp^ae,Either the World-Mind imparts each individualimpulse in which case, accept the impulse it imparts ;or else itgave the impulse once of all, with all its longentail of consequence (reading Ka-revrelvei, a brilliantand plausible emendation for the text rt ev TWL, andCoraes KOI TI evreivy, which is quite in Marcus manner,x. 31). Now the distinction in both these obscure andperhaps corrupt sections is between a special and afatal or universal Providence. Marcus is concerned toshow in either event, resignation is the fitting attitudeof the Sage. Can we allow alarsto God ?e.g.knowledge of particuvi. 44, he puts the hypothesis ofthe restriction of Divine interest (or power) to thegreater laws to the; larger issues of life : El Se w/Bov\evcravTo KCIT* ISiai/ jrepl efjiov irepi ye T&V Koiv&veftovXevaavTo, ol$ Kar e7raKo\ov9rjcnv K. ravra. . .crrepyew o<f>et\a>.Is He not eternallyengrossed either in Himself or in contemplation of theType ? Here, it seems to me, Marcus tries to exemptfrom the operation of this rigid and indefeasible sequencecertain important events in the world-order, towardswhich Providence still makes an exceptional andpeculiar movement of interest and concern. In theeicacrTov,e<f> latter passage he goes so far as to say,each trivial event, circumstance, casualtyis Divine(as according to Christian teaching). In the former,if I may extrude the (to me) incomprehensible word

""Humanum"""THE UNIVERSE 237,we see detailed vigilance of Providence isrestricted to "greatheroes and great haps" (as inLucan,paucis vivit genus and Cesar;staunt to the mutineers who think the gods care fortheir petty lives). These he calls ra Kvptcorara ;andtowards these, not predetermined by course of Fateand unravelled string of destiny, the World-Soul makesa special and impulsive onslaught. (Could aXoyiaramean"as yet not predestined, still leaving scope forspecial settlement or could we read; ako^ia-rw^ rj,requiring no particular exercise of reason," etc. ?)Inany case I am clear there is a distinct antithesisbetween the more religious and the purely scientificconception of the world-order and that whatever;private opinion Marcus may hold, he is not going tocommit himself either here or elsewhere.6. ix. 1.(Impiety not to regard pleasure and painas TI Koivr] $ucrt9 does : She treats themindifferently,"eTTio-rjs, by which I mean,) TO crvpftatveiv eWcr??? raTO ^T}? rot? ryivofJLevois K. iiri^fivo^kvoi^ opfifj TIVI dp^aiaT?}? Ilpovoias that (" they befall indifferently all whoseexistence isconsequent upon the original impulse ofProvidence KaO")TJV OTTO TWO? apxfo wppjorey eVl TqvS*TIJV SiaKoo-fjirjo-ip which(" gave the original and firstmomentum to the cosmic ordering of things"),<rv\\afiovcraTivas \6yovs TQOV eaofjLevtov K. ^vvd^ei^ <yovifJLOi>sVTroo-Tdaewv re K.a<f)opio-ao-a, yuera/SoXftw K. $ia&o%(t)VTOIOVTCOV(" by selecting (?) certain germsof futureexistences and assigning to them productive capacitiesof realisation, change, and phenomenalsuccession." E.).The conflict in his mind between the religious and thescientific explanation of the world appears in everyreference to Providence. ii. 3 : Ta TWV Oe&v

"From""238 MARCUS AURELIUSTdTT}<?Tv^ysOVK avevK. eTTYTrXotf?)? TWV flpokota ^LOiKov/jievcov. ("In thegods work there is providence everywhere. For theaction of chance is the course of Nature, or the weband woof of the dispositions of Providence," which givesthe sense admirably, though OVK avev does not implyidentity.) Havra etceWev pel, Trpocrecm Se TO Avay-Kaiov, K. TO TO) oX Koo-jjutp ovo-v/ji(f)6pov /Jieposel.providence (the personal and religious view)flows all ;and side by side with it is necessity andthe advantage of the Universe (the scientific andimpersonal), of which you are a part."Here thereis a compromise ;both views are stated in a parallel ;they are neither reconciled nor allowed to quarrel, onlyheld in leash. ii. 11, in a celebrated vindication ofDeath, el pev Oeol elcriv ovSev Seivov (/carca)ere OVK<ydpav 7repi/3d\oi,ev)el Se rjrot,OVK elcrlv rjov ^e\ei avToisrt /JLOI ffiv ev KOCT^JLO)Keva> Oecov rjA\\a KOI elalv, K. fjue\,ei avrols TWVdvOpcoireicov. This is the strongest passage in the bookabout the gods and their part in human affairs. 1 iv. 3 :Avavecacrd/jLevos TO Sie^evypevov rjrot Hpoi/oia rjK. e% OGWV aTre^ei^OfjOTL o KOO-JJUO^ wo-dvei,("Recallto mind the alternative, either a foreseeingProvidence or blind atoms, and all the aboundingproofs that the world is as it were a city.")We seehere clearly to which side he is leaning, to the politicoreligiousconception as opposed to the scientific. vi.1 We may remember how closely united in Quintilian s age were thetwo themes for unending discussion: "whether the world was ruledby Providence," and "whether the Wise Man should take office,"asingular instance of the reciprocal influence of metaphysical theoryand conduct.

""""THE UNIVERSE 23910. Again, engaged in the contemplation of death, healmost comforts himself with the thought of atomismas a consolation for leaving the world (ii. 11): *HrotKVfceow K. dvTfji7r\OKrj K. aKeSacr/jbos rj GVWCTW K. raft? K.ripoVoia. The world is either a welter of alternate("combination and dispersion," cf.Empedocles famousdictum, or a unity of order and Providence.")El pevovv ra Trporepa, ri /cal67ridvjJL(a elicaiw crvyKpifjuariK.<>vp/jiq) Toiovrq) ev$i,aTpi/3eiv ; (" Why crave to linger onin such a random medley and confusion ?). . .rjgeiyap eV eft o a/ce^ao-fios 6 TI dv TTOIO) Do what I(" will,dispersion will overtake me").El Se Odrepd eari,cre/3ft) K. evcrraOoo K. T<Mdappw AIQIKOVVTI("I reverence,I stand steadfast, I find heart in the power that disposes In iv. 27 we have a similar butall").morehopeful passage : "Hrot KOO-JJLOS SiareTaypevos, rj tcvtceavA\\a fjbr^v KOO-[JLOS rjIv aol jjiev rt?iSvvarcu, ev Be rc3 Havrl dtcoajjiia ;K. ravra ovrco nrdvrfov ^iaiceKpL^evwv K.^i>aKe^yfjbev(DvK. (TVfjbTraQwv. Either an ordered universe or else a("welter of confusion. Assuredly, then, a world-order;or think you the order subsisting within yourself iscompatible with disorder in the All 1 and that, too,when all things, however distributed and diffused, areaffected sympathetically.")Here Marcus almost unanswerably argues from the reason within to the reasonwithout, from subjective to objective regularity andmethod. In xii. 1 we have a parallel to the Horatianpermitte divis cetera;TO fjbi\\ov I jriTpe ^rrjs rfjla. xii. 14 is a useful passage:"JHVot1 I accept Kendall s excellent suggestion, for the "textus receptusis absurd ;but would not ov i^v dXXot K^CT^OS be a simpler correction ?Coraes <rv[j.Tre(}>vp[jitvosis also extremely probable.

240 MARCUS AURELIUSK. aTrapdflaros raft?, rj Flpoyoia tXacr 4/409, 77("et:atoT77T09 airpo(ndrr)To^. Either fixednecessity and an inviolable order, or a merciful Providence, or a random and ungoverned medley.") If thefirst, TI avTireivew ; El Be n/jo^ota, eVtSe^o/ze^ TOiXdcrfceaOai, a%tov cravrov Trorfarov e/c rov deiov ftor)6eia$("if a Providence waiting to be merciful, make yourselfworthy of the Divine aid," etc.). Here again thereligious conception is uppermost and for the; singleoccasion in the whole of the volume, efficacy of prayerand propitiation are brought within range of philosophicthought. But there is no attempt to accommodate theseviews with scientific experience and in the end;Marcus leaves us in a dualism which is (as we haveoften noted) creditable to his candour and his commonsense, if not to his logic. Finally, since his wholespeculative philosophy subserves his practice, his realend and aim, he proves (xii. 24) acquiescence right,whatever be the ultimate explanation of the Universe :eVl TWV ej;ci)6ev crvfjufiaivovrcov, OTL r/rot KCLT eVt-Tv%iav, Kara rj npovoiav, ovre Se rfj enrvnr^ia fjue/jLTrreovovre rf) npoj/oia eyK\rjreov. ("You cannot quarrel withchance ; you cannot arraign Providence/ The government of the world is either accidental, and so beneathour notice and concern ;or Divine, and therefore aboveour understanding and beyond our criticism.)

""CHAPTEE VITHE ALLEGED CONCILIATION OF THE TWONATURES(A)VANITY AND INSIGNIFICANCE OF HUMAN LIFE INTHE MEASURELESS GULF OF TIMEANALYSIS1. This human life out of place in the "vain show of the world;deliberate quenching of Will-to-live.2. Dwells on intrinsic baseness of life ; scornful language for bodyand life ; passing moment (all that is ours) insignificant.3. Man contemptible in relation to Space as to Time ; quarrelsomechildren, snapping puppies, bursting bubbles.4. Corollary of such preaching, not resignation ; if man a bubble,why trouble about duty or world-order ?5. God (within or without} no support to moral endeavour. (Textsof the vanity of life s pursuits, smoke, dust, leaves, husk,etc.)1. IT is clear that in such a world of successive andunceasing change, of persistence only through variation,human life must seem strangely out of place, with itsfixed centre of will and personality and its materialenvironment in perpetual flux. Instead of appearingas to our modern Gnostics an oasis in the cruelwilderness of the actual, human society is precisely thatsphere in which the Unreason at the root of things is16

"242 MARCUS AURELIUSmost justly impeached. Man is born but to die ;hewins self-consciousness only to discover its torture ;theuse of will only to feel its negative value. The wholepersonal philosophy of Marcus is a study of death(yLteXer?? Oavdrov), a deliberate quenching of the willto live, not merely by appealing to a religious sense(eTriTpeireiv rfj Ilpovoia), but by dwelling with remorseless analysis on the sordid details of life, and trying toborrow from such consideration disgust for the wholeweary business. I have reserved this as an episode inour survey of his cosmology ; because, while a study ofhis own nature convinced him, as we saw, of the valueof moral and social endeavour, he discovers here nothingbut arguments for Quietism and the extinction of motiveand desire. The two sides of his philosophy are herein clearest contrast ; 77 KQIVJ) and eprj (f)v<n,swith theirincompatible impulse. The one calls us to passiveresignation, the other, though fitfullyand with no clearobject, to activity in the smaller commonwealth and;lies inalthough he protests in one place man s dutythe energy rather than in receptivity (evepyeia thanand in another that of the two natures (/u arj 080?, v. 3), the path is one and the same,elsewhere he places OO-^OTT?? above Si/ccuoavvr}, andcanonizes as the first virtue a theology, mystic ornegative. And this on examination isnothing else buta scientific conviction of the world svanity and unreality of phenomena as they play in idle illusion abovean inscrutable ground. For Marcus and his fellows,though one be wise and another foolish, are like children sporting on the steps or in the open vestibule ofa temple, the doors of which are for ever shut.2. To us it seems a truism that from the Secularist

"As1 vi. 13. He is the avowed enemy to the spiritualizing of the emotions ;"THE TWO NATURES 243or Christian view alike it is needful to dwell on thevalue and significance of life even in the humblestsurroundings. Aurelius believes that a moral attitudecannot be attained until we are certain of its essentialbaseness or turpitude. He is, like Lucretius, aRealist,"dwelling with especial and deliberate disgust uponthe contemptible origin of man, 1 and seeking to stiflethe softer emotions and to tear violently asunder thephysical from the sentimental side in that odd and evermarvellous complex, Love. For the body he has nolanguage base enough. Very early he strikes the note,or rather minor chord, which is to predominate.ii. 2 :o>9rJS?; diroOvtjo-Kayv rwv aapfcicov Ka\v0pos K. oardpia K. KpoKvfyavros ere vevpcovdprrjpiwv irXey/mdrLov.with near presence ofdeath, despise poor flesh this refuse of blood and bones,this web and tissue of nerves and veins and arteries."ii. 17: Tov dv0pa)7Tivov /3iov 6 fj,ev ^povos, anyfjiij rjBe ovaia, peovcra rjBe alcrdrjo-is, d/jivBpd r)Be o\ov TOVcr&>//,o.T09 crvy/cpioris, evaqTrros rjBe tyw%r}}popftos 77BeTV^T), SvaTefc/JLaprov 77Se $^[4?}, a/cpirov. 2w6\6vTi Selirelv Trdvra, rd /mev orcoyLtaro?, 7rora/A09 ra Se r?}?BeTI va-repo^rj/jiia \rj07j. In man s("life,time is but a moment ; being, a flux ;sense is dim ;thematerial frame, corruptible ; soul, an eddy of breath ;destiny, hard to define ; fame, ill at appraise. In brief,he reduces everything to its "beggarly elements," its naked truth.This is certainly logical ; perhaps not unnatural to some fastidiousminds who in this matter can never overcome an initial astonishment atthe odd yoke-fellows, romance and passion, angel and animal ;but itis as certainly not wise ; ^TTI T&V /card T^V evvovaiav, frreplovK. yuerd rtj os (TTracr/aoO /j-v^apiov

""244 MARCUS AURELIUSthings of the body are but a stream that flows, thingsof the soul a dream and vapour) ; life, a warfare and asojourning" [? in an alien land]; "andafterfame, oblivion."Surely it is Leopardi who is talking, and not a professedand sincere vindicator of the ways of God ? Non taliauxilio non defensoribus istis !Length of time isequally an illusion from; many passages in which heinsists that the present moment alone is ours (withoutthe inevitable Cyrenaic corollary !),I single iii. 7 :Trorepov eVl 7r\eov Sido-Typa ^pbvovTO>craojjLaTi Trepie^or)tyv%y rj CTT e\acraov ^pr^aeTai^ ov$ OTIOVV avra)1 :IJLOVOV 77 efcacrros TO Trapov TOVTO TOaicapialov the(" passing this minute," razor-edge onwhich we stand with the two gulfs of past and futureyawning on either side.) iv. 50 :ySXevre japoTriaco TOdxayes TOV atwz/09, K. TO TTpoaa) a\\o direipov (so iv. 3coupled with TO ra^o? 7% TTCIVTCOV \tj6rjs is TO x^ec/) e/caTepa aTreipov atw^o?.) v. 23 : TO aTreipov TOVTrappy KOTOS K. /AeXXoi^TO? dxayes w TrdvTa evacfxivl^eT(The present is like a narrow isthmus washed by thetwo immeasurable oceans of that which has been andhas yet to be.) ix. 32. How short a spanis life!dxayes 5e TO TT^OO T?)S <yevecrea)Sa>5 K. TO fJueTa Trjv$id\von,v o/jLoiws aireipov. xii. 7. Shortness of life, Trjv&X&vt-ia.v TOV oiricrco K. Trpoaco alwvos. 32 : TTOCTTOV/jueposTOV djreipov K. dxai/ous alwvos dTroi^e^epiaTaie/cdaTM ; (Kendalls translation of iv. 32 in full willgive the English reader the best idea of Marcus mean"ing You can : get rid (of the agitations that besetyou), and in so doing, will indeed live at large, byembracing the whole universe in your view, comprehending all eternity and imagining the swiftness ofchange in each particular ; seeing how brief is the

"1THE TWO NATURES 245passage from birth to dissolution, birth, with its unfathomable before ; death, with its infinite hereafter."3. Man, contemptible in relation to Time, is noless so in regard to Space ;his greatest empireis buta tiny speck in a corner of earth ;and what is earthto the boundless void ? With this idea we are familiarfromScipio sdream,"lwhere Scipio blunts the keenedge of earthly ambition by showing the pettiness ofits domain; to us a wearisome commonplace, but tothe average citizen, content with the religion andthe tradition of his State, a paradox and a wantonsacrilege.iii. 10 :piKpov TO TT}? 777? ywia&ioi/ OTTOV 77.iv. 3 :0X7; re yap 77 777 orriy/JLT] tc.ravi-fj^ iroa-rovywktSioj 77 KaToitcTjais avrrj ; The whole earth is but("a point, your habitation but a tiny nook thereon.")iv. 48 : KariSelv del ravOpcoTTLva co? e^rjfiepa K. evre\rjK. e^Qes l^ev fjivgdpiov avpiov Be rdpixos 77LookTe<f>pa. ("at all human things, behold how fleeting and how sorry!but yesterday a mucus-clot; to-morrow, dust or ashes !v. 29 : Kd-m/os K. dTrepxofjLdL"). . . 33 : "Oa-ov ov&eTra)o-rroSos 77{TtfeXero? K. 777-0*. ovopa 77ov$e ovofjia.. . .All the things we most value in life, KGVCL K. o-airpdK.jjiiapa K. KWi&ia, ^iaZaKvo^va K. TraiBta <f>i\6veiKa,<ye\wvTaelr evdvs K\aiovra ("empty, rotten, insignificant, snapping puppies or quarrelsome children, thatlaugh and anon fall to crying"2).vi. 47. List of1So Seneca (Nat. Qucest. i. prsef.).The Soul amid the stars looks"down in mirth : Hoc est illud punctum quod inter tot gentes ferro etigne dividitur ? . . . Formicarum iste discursus est. Punctum . . . Quid illis etnobis interest exigui mensura corpusculi? est istud in quonavigatis, bellatis, regna disponitis. . . . Contemnit domicilii priorisangustias."2He might perhaps have spared us the superfluous nastiness of theBath-Simile. viii. 24 : OTTOIOV crot 0a(verat rb \ofc<r6ai,^Xaiov

"""""246 MARCUS AURELIUSheroes who are now all dust ; avrrjs T?}? brunfoov K.eQrjpepov TMV avOptoTrwv 0)779 x^ ** 1 who have("made man s fateful fleeting life their jest").36. Asiaand Europe, ywiai TOV KOO-JJUOV, all sea, ardycov TOVKoo-fjiov : Athos (he is thinkingof Xerxes achievementas a type of imperial sovereignty at its climax) pwXdpiot/TOV Kocrpov.vii. 6 8 :Sage, calm, and unruffled thoughwild beasts Sia<r7ra ra jjteXuSpta TOV Trepi-TeOpa/jL/jLevovTOVTOV (j)vpd^aTo$ material(" integument offlesh,"where Dr. Eendall euphemizes the hard bitter sarcasmof the original this; lump of clay hung round mewhich cries out for food").viii. 20 : ri Be a<ya0bv rfjTrojji<{>6XuYi o~vv6o~Ta)o~r) rjKCLKQV Sia\v6eicrrj ;ra 6/jLOta SeK. eVt \v%yov.4. We are here not far from getting annoyedwith Marcus persistent inconsistency. It is his wholepurpose to mark off and separate man from the rest ofthings his virtue proceeds by its own mysterious;path, hard to be compassed and understood, to the goalof its being,"vi. 17, and has nothing to do with mereelemental change. Yet thus severed in life from theinnocent and unreflecting pleasure of animals, in themoment of his greatest suspense and anxiety, he issuddenly classed with not even animals, but with theinanimate and mechanical and automatic. That thecorollary of this is resignation, peace, social work, is duevdiiip yXoi&des, Trdvra <ri/f%afrdTOLOUTOV TTO.V /i^pos TOV ftiov K. iravWe prefer his ^77 cri/cxcu mv ftS/de diravSaiv of v. 9 ;and wemust remember, too, that Marcus here as elsewhere is too sincere to beconsistent. For example, how the proud self-possession of iii. 5 : Op6bi>ofiv elva-L %pr? ovx<- opdoti/aevov, gives place to the modesty of vii. 12 : dpObs?) dpdojjfMevos, a devrepbs TrXoOs, indeed, to the complete spontaneity ofthe Spirit s choice, a "law to itself" ;to the sober advice of vii. 7 :Mr?

"""""THE TWO NATURES 247to a mere temperamental peculiarity of the Emperor;it is certainly not logic. To a more sanguine and fierynature, the gladness of fighting and defiance would sethim in deadly conflict against a power which, thoughultimately certain to triumph, it is pure joy so far aspossible to thwart. If such a Deity bade me go tohell, to hell I would gladly go and on the same;deep sense of the fitting rests the strange religiousAtheism (or rather ir-religion) of Lucretius. If manis a bubble on the ocean of time, byall means let himfollow his bent, and not do violence to his inner self.But the ascetic has nothing to say logically against thevoluptuary and to ;prate about reason, duty, a standardof right and wrong, sympathy with the world-soul,merely irritates a good-natured adversary, who isreadyto leave you with a higher criterion," ifyou wouldonly grant him a similar freedom of choice and inclination.He on his part has no wish to depreciate or criticizethe satisfaction of the Mystic ;he will not even callhis inner joys, illusion or an imaginary world of purehallucination ;he knows that everything is that,relative, fleeting, uncanonized by any yet discoveredstandard ; for nothing can effectively bridge the gulfbetween two personalities. A man can make of theworld what he likes, and no one has the right to sayhim".E/eacrro? ev TO>nay."ISlw vol Tr^rjpoc^opeiada),Eom. xiv. 5 ;and although St. Paul isspeaking aboutthe unessential, where reasonable divergence and tolerance can be permitted, the maxim can be taken up intoa far more serious realm. This pure subjectivity canonly be corrected by the social edict which, makingforthe greatest happiness of the greatest number," always

""^e"248 MARCUS AURELIUSthe aim, whether avowed or not, takes the average ofhuman character and aspirations, and decides that, onthe whole, man is instinctively (though illogically)moral/cal;that a general agreement on rd Trpatcreafir)can be reached, even apart from religioussanction. But in Marcus system, the universal moralinstinct, sign of essential solidarity, lies useless in thebackground, like Anaxagoras disappointing maxim; andit is not too much to say that his theology provides noargument whatever for the endeavour to right. For,viewed as Fate or the Absolute, God has no concernwith such a distinction ;viewed as theDeity Within,"the divine voice within condones or enjoins the extremestvagaries of subjective impulse.5. But I am travelling somewhat beyond myimmediate task ;and Marcus himself might gentlyremind me that engrossment in the present duty (TOirdpov . . . d/capiaiov) is the truest rule. viii. 37.In a somewhat hard-hearted passage on mourners, heends, Tpdo-os irav rovro K. Xu0poi>ev 6v\dic<p,intranslatableindeed. "All conies to stench and refuse atlast." ix. 24 : IlaiSlcov opyal K. Tralyvia, K. irvev/jbaTiayeicpous jBacn-d^ovra children s(" squabbles, or stage-farce,and poor breath carrying a corpse ;is not phantomland more palpable and solid ?").ix. 29: &>9<?Se KOI TO, TToXm/ea ravra K.TTpa/cTLKa dvOpcoTTid f /jLvgwv pecrTa.oterat,How(" cheap, insooth, are these pygmies of politics, these sage doctrinaires in statecraft ! Drivellers everyone ! ")x. 1 7 :Tov 6\ov aiwvos K. rf)$ oX?;? ovaia? cryj/e^w? ^avraaiaKOI on Trdvra ra Kara pepo? w? /jiev TT/OO? ovaiav,TTpo? xpbvov, TpuTrdfou irepio-Tpo^. All("KYXpa|J.is*ft>9individual things are but a grain of millet . . . the

"THE TWO NATURES 249turn of a screw.") x. 1 7 : TaavOp<i*invaareK. rb fjbrjSev. x. 34. All men are leaves ((/)v\\a. . .<f>uXXdpia).Tlavra yap ravraeapos eTriyiyveTai, copyelraave/j,o<; Kara/3effXrjKev eVet^ v\rj erepa. ... TooXiyoxpoVioi KOIVOV iracrtv. 38 :M^Se/Tore <7Vfj,7repi-<j)avTaov TO TrepLKeifJievov c^etwSe?, K. TCL opydvia rauraTa irepi,7re7r\a<TiJieva. ("Neverconfound it (the truepower, the will) with the mere containing shell, andthe various appendedJorgans." ) xi. 2 :Me^vrjao eVlTa Kara /juepos Tpe%6ivK. Trj Staipecrei avTwv et?KaTa<J>p6Vt](nilevai. xii. 1 and 2. Various uncomTaplimentary names for the body TO TrepiTeBpafjLfjievov aoiaapKiSiov v\iKa . . . dyyela K. K. <|>XoidKaGdpfjiara . ..shell . . . materialTrepi/cei/jLeva /cpedSia (" fleshlyhusks and impurities").xii. 27: Tlov vvv iravTa6K6LVa , KaTTKOS K. <TTTo86s K. fJivdo? OV$T) fJLV00<$.- 31 :El Se GicadTa ev/caTa<f)p6i>r)Ta TrpoaiOu eirl Te\evTaiov,TO eireaQai TCO Adyw K. TU> @ea). 32. How tiny aportion of eternity, of substance, of world-soul has beenallotted to you!ev TTOO-TW 8e jSwXapiw -n}? 0X77?1This contemptuous, semi-gnostical language, and this repetition ofinsulting diminutives, is a fashion of most second century writers ; cf.Maximus Tyrius, xiii., where the body is dva-xpTjarrbv TOVTO 7repi/3X?7/m.. . .xAcu tSia ^(prjfj^epa, pa/a a dadevij K. Tptixtva. . . . KCLK&V K. dirXya ToiK., . .vo<repbv 0p/u,/jia. afjirb^evov K. 8iappov QV rei"xi SefffAtan/iplov. Itwas certainly not the Christian Church, but the fatigued classical spirit,that introduced ascetic anchoritism and a Manichsean contempt forthe body. Even the genial Plotinus, whose entire aim is anti-Dualistic, is led away by this fundamental tenet of the new Platonism(a spirit by no means confined to the School of that name), Ennead, vi.7. 31 : the fair objects of sense arouse the waking soul, but do notbeguile it into supposing they are original ; for they are but counterfeits ;never would those blessed ideals venture to defile themselves byembarking in this miry clay of bodily vesture, to befoul and destroythemselves (/AT? yap av roX/i^crai ^/cetVa old tffriv els fiopfiopov ffw^drwvi, K. pvTravai eavra K. d<f>avi<rai).

250 MARCUS AURELIUS; nravra ravra evOvfJuovfjievos, fjbrjSev /j,eya <f>avrd%ov(contrast Aristotle s e$ ocrov evBe^eTai aOavarl^ew).The sum of the whole book may be found in thenext section. /7w9 eavra>xprjTcu TO Hye/jboviicbv ;ev yap TOVTO) TO nrav. ra 8e Xonra rj Trpoaiperd e. rjdirpoaipeTa, ^eKpa K. How Kair^os.(" goesit with yourInner Self ? that iseverything. All else, in yourcontrol or out of it, is smoke and dust of the dead." l )(B) THE USES AND METHODS OF PHILOSOPHY; THESURRENDER OF INTELLECTUALISMANALYSIS6. Settled early in life his few (paradoxic) dogmata;burnt hisbooks ; his style and unction all his own , formal doctrines,others .7. Abandons speculative philosophy (not tending to edification);"aims at mere practical goodness and piety ; his open mind"on all ultimate problems.6. One or two points remain :(1) what is thekind of science or method of philosophy which has taughtMarcus this theory of the world and man s place in it ?(2) whether it is possible to stand out in self-will andobstruct the eternal order ? because it is clear thatpeople not born to patience and devoutness, in whosebreast rages the sacred fire of discontent, will be glad1 I am not quite comfortable about dismissing irpoaipera into thiscontemptible category it seems too ; sweeping even for Marcus thepessimist. I would suggest that by this word he conveys a domainproper and subordinate to the exercise of the Inner Self, by willing ;and therefore really included in it, and not to be distinguished as havingan essential value in itself. For to emphasize the mere inner tranquillity,released from any willing or striving, is surely too Buddhistic forMarcus ? But I only suggest.

""""""""THE TWO NATURES 251to hear what measure of completeness, distinctness,individuality, one can attain, even if it be painful, andin the end a failure. Who is the character in one ofStevenson s apologues, who, when he hears of theEagnarok, says, I am going off to fight for Odin ?It is the dull and meaningless omnipotence whichrouses us to challenge, even to despise, the tyrantsovereign of a world so worthless. But if he demandsour help and our sympathy, waits for, and will notforce our loyalty, the whole horizon ischanged ; themeaning of everyday life becomes clearer little ; thingsfit in to a system, which, sublime, is not infinite."The very weakness of the power that makes forrighteousnessis the best enlisting sergeant: Moriamurpro rege nostro Maria Theresa." But first to thepeculiar method of Marcus inquiry. Now it is clearthat early in life he was much inclined to become astudent, to read and meditate much over bygoneauthors, and to spend over the refined subtleties ofHellenic systems a life which was owed to publicduties and the common welfare. His temper, too,essentially speculative and sceptic, had its especialdangers, of which he was aware. So, after settlingupon a few maxims on which to guide his life, the807fiara 7rp6-%ei,pa, so frequently summoned and paraded,after deciding on the supreme merits of Stoic Monism,he abandoned further search, quenched his curiosity,and burnt, if not his boats, at least his books. Whatself-devotion there was in this sacrifice of inclination !He may have borrowed his technical phrases fromothers, his doctrine of self-sufficingness from Seneca,of the indwelling Deity from Epictetus, his charityand forbearance from the abundant practical examples

"""The"On""""""252 MARCUS AURELIUSin his childhood, from his mother, from Antoninus, 1 theman"old Cephalus of the drama, but in the veryantinomies of his system, the bluntness and vagaries ofhis unpractised style, the fervour of his intense sincerity,the richness of his concrete illustration and metaphor,21Besides the long section in Book I,, see vi. 30 :ILdyra, ws A-vrwivov2Some of his more memorable sayings:"Do each act, live each day, as if it were to be your last.""Thegood man ishigh priest and minister of the gods.""Our human states are houses in the supreme commonwealth."Do even the smallest thing, mindful of the close connexion of thingshuman and Divine.""Thebright flame assimilates all to itself, and only burns thebrighter so should a wise man take life s;pains."A poet of old said, dear city of Cecrops and shall;I not say,beloved city of God !"Full already is the story of your life ; completed your publicservice"The(reXeia i] Xarou/ry/a).finest kind of retaliation is not to become like.""In this flux of things, he who singles out another for his love, isas if a passing swallow caught his fancy ; and, lo it is already out of!sight."cannot "iThingsinfluence our judgments.lover of glory places his good in another s action the; voluptuary,in his own passivity ;the wise, in his own unfettered activity.""Why be ashamed, if lame, to mount the glittering ramparts of theCity of Truth by another s helping hand ?"Near at hand isthy forge tfulness of all ; near, too, forgetfulness ofall for thee.""The fount of the good within will ever give pure water, if you digabout it.""How easy for a man to be divine, and yet be recognized by none !"A mind ifree from every passion is an Acropolis.""Afountain, if you stand blaspheming it and casting in mud, ceasesnot to send forth clear water.""Come quickly, Death ! lest perchance I forget myself.""Even if the leaving life so be the one right action in life" (cf.Nothing in life became him as well as the leaving it ").the same tree, yes ;not of the same creed."

""""""But"THE TWO NATURES 253the quickness of his eye for realistic detail, we mustlament in the interests both of literature and philosophy that he could not enjoy a more ample leisure(evpv^copla). In spite of his constant repetitions, inspite of the patent fallacy in that philosophic schemewhich he fondly supposed was the foundation of hisethical practice, he always compels attention by thedignity, the distinction, the earnest directness of hisstyle. He commands and uses as his servant thecrabbed definitions and phrases of Stoic pedantry ;andin a certain atmosphere, and an indescribable unction,he foreshadows Plotinus ;whose genial mysticism, setfree now fromphysiology,"stands in such markedcontrast to the pessimism of the Emperor. He might,we can easily conceive, have hewn out a more enduringtemple of truth, softened the asperities, and reconciledthe inconsistencies of his creed ;which as it lies beforeus in detached aphorisms,is but a tumbled heap ofbricks in disorder, and with no clue to their combination. But from the solitary meditation,1the Alone," in which lay his deepest joy, publicservice called him ;and from this, whether in battle"alone withor senate-house, he never flinched. Yet he abandonedthe delights of speculative philosophy with a sigh.needs continually to remind himself that he has notHetime, perhaps not capacity (as he modestly avers), forbecoming adialecticoraphysician;that others,if he challenge comparison with the great minds ofpure thought, may despise and laugh at his pretensions ;Complaint of an actor cut short in his part:I have not yetspoken my full allotted part Never mind !;in life your three-fifthsis the entire plot."1 iv. 3 : 7-775 vTTOxw/^Jo ews rrjs ds TOVTO rb dypidiov eavrov.

""254 MARCUS AURELIUSbut that they cannot do this if, in abandoningall claimto wisdom, he strives to be simply good.V40e? ra ptpKia. 3 :rrjv Se TMV7. ii. 2 :Ptp\iu>v Styav ptyov ! Hisuse of philosophya pure moral science, in the sense of Epictetus.ii. 17: Tl ovv TO TrapaTre/^^jrat, ^vvdfievov ; ev K.is ofTOVTO o ev T&><fu\oa-o<f>ia. rrjpelv TQV evbovKT\. What then can direct ourdvvf3pi<TTov, (" goings1one thing, and one alone, philosophy ;which is to keepthe deity within inviolate and free from scathe.")vi. 30 :Aycovlo-aLriva TOLOVTOS crv^eivri^ olbv ereStruggle to remainr}6e\r)cr Trotfcrai, (f)L\oo-o(pia.such as Philosophy would have =you," as above,Simple, good, sincere, grave, unaffected, a friendto justice, God-fearing, considerate, affectionate, andstrenuous induty."So viii. 1 : TroXXofc r aXXot?K. avros (reavTq) 877X09 yeyovas Troppa) (friXoo-otylas,ina purely ethical sense. So ix. 29 : AirXovv evriKalal$r}fjLov TO<^)tXoo~o^)ta9 epyov. Such practicalwisdom and guidance to serenity, the sovereign good,will be embodied in short gnomic maxims, pregnantwith meaning, held ready for any emergency. Helearnt from Eusticus to "renounce sophistic ambitionsand essays on philosophy, discourses provocative tovirtue, or fancy portraitures of the sage or the philanthropist."i. 7 :fJirj eKTpaTrijvat, et? 77X01; oxxjuoriKoyXoydpta &ia\ey6<T0ai, 77 <f)avTao-io7r\rffCTa)<;TQV77 TOZ^ evepyeTiKov avSpo, eTr&eiKvvo OaL (cf.x. 16: "No more mere talk of what the Good Manshould be. Be it!").i. 17. He thanks the godsfor saving him from pedantry : OTTW? eTreOvurjaaTO avyypdfaw ireplrwv Oecoprj/jbdrcov 77 Trpo-airo-

""<f>u<n,Kose&GG6awv"""THE TWO NATURES 255eVt rovs avyypanels rj (rv\\o<yi,<rfji,ov<;dva\veivrj irepl ra perecopoXoyifcd tcaraylveo-Oai,. ("Thanks, too,that, in spite of my ardour for philosophy, I did notfall into the hands of any sophist, or sit poring overessays or syllogisms, or become engrossedin scientificspeculation.") ApLfAVTijTa aov ovrc e^ovcnYou have no(" special keenness of wit,"v. 5.)erepa vroXXa e outc <e^et? etVeti/* ov japvii. Similarly, 67 : Kal pr) on din)Xmorasic.i Sta TOVTO aTroyv&s, ACT\.,to become free, modest, social, and resigned. v. 1 :Things are so wrapped in veils that to giftedphilosophers not a few, all certitude is unattainable.Nay, to the Stoics themselves such attainment seemsprecarious ; and every act of intellectual assent isfallible ;for where is the infallible man ?(rapevTTpdy/jiaTa ev roiavrf) . . . eyKaKityeie. wcrre . . .e8ofe Trawrd Trao w aKardX^Trra elvai. . . . SvcrKard-\rj7rra . . . K. Traaa 77 rjfjuerepa (Tv<y/caTd6e(ri,s [AeTcnr-TcoTo? TroO ydp 6 a/ieTaTTTWTo? ; So much for hissemi-sceptical rejection of formal logic,of scientificstudy, of dogmatic certitude, in the interests of theone thing of value, moral uprightness. For thisdepends on no special or curious lore, but on therealising of these few truisms which all men acceptand no one practises.(C)SCIENTIFIC STUDY AS A MEDITATION ON DEATHANALYSIS8. Though in effect this piety demolishes reason,still insists onknowledge and definition of each thing.9."scientific"One chief rule; distinguish material and cause; know worldorderbefore ascertaining own duty.

""256 MARCUS AURELIUS10. Universal Decay, the supreme lesson; scientific knowledge acomfort (even to Epicurus against pain} by showing necessary place of everything in the whole.11. Shortness of alleviated life by its tested emptiness ; science leadsto indifference and reconciles to Death.8. But at the same time the Stoic spirit in himgave not up tamely its favourite dogma, "Keclemptionthrough Science." Throughout the whole, and withstriking frequency in the later books, side by sidewith this pietistic demolition of reason, he insists onthe need of particular and scientific knowledge, as weshould call it. He is clearly of opinion that withoutsuch rational or intellectual vision no man can seethings in their naked truth (or unreality), pierce to thecore of things, detect their proportion and co-ordination,discover the links which somehow bind them into aharmonious whole. Just as the Platonic dialecticianmounts from particular to universal, and returns fromthe mount of God with fresh faculties and clearer eyesarmed with the tables of the Law, so Marcus believesthat the prudent man refers each special instance toits general law, and regards every sensible or materialcircumstance in the light of its definition. Let himspeak for himself. iii. 11:" Always define and outline carefully the object of perception so as to realizeits naked substance (TO opov rj Trepiypaffrrjv aelTTOiel&Oai TOV vTroiriTTTOvTo^ (fravracrTov &JCTT avroOTTOIOV e. KCLT ovalav ryvfAvov), to discriminate itsto markown totality by aid of its surroundings,its specific attributes and those of the componentelements into which it can be analysed." (o\ov Sio\<ovBirjprjiJievcos ft^eTreiv K. TO iSiov OVO/AO,avrov K. raeiceivwv e f &v o-vveiepiQr) K. et? a dva\v6ijcreTai,

""THE TWO NATURES 257\eyeiv irap eavnp.) Nothing so emancipates themind as the power of systematically and truthfullytesting everything that affects, and looking into themin such a way as to infer the kind of order to whicheach belongs (? world-order), the special use whichit subserves, its relation and value to the universe,and, in particular, to man as a citizen of that supremeworld-city."OvBev jap OVTO) fJLeyaXotypoavvrjs TTOLIJTL-KOV TIo>? TO e\ey^eLV 6Bw K. d\rj@r)t,a e/caa-TOV TWV TO>ySt o) vTroTTLTTTOvTwv Bvvaadai,K. TO del OVTCOS et? avraopdv wcrre <TvveiTi{Bd\\eiv, OTTOLCD TLVL rw KOO-JJLW, OTTOICLVTiva TOVTW xpeiav irape%6iJLvov,riva [lev e^eu d%iav co?7T/009 TO f O\OV TlVCi Se 0)5 7T/905 TOP dvOptoTTOV, 7TO\iTr)Vovra TToXew? T?}<? dvayrdrr]^.9. This process is, very roughly, to be describedas the distinction of cause and material; e.g.iv. 21:TV? eVt rovrov f) laropia rfjs d\7)Qeia<s ; ^laipecr^ et9 TOV\IKOV K. et? TO atVtwSe?. How can the truth be("searched out in this case 1namely, the odd problemof how there is room in the air for all the Spirits ofBy distinguishing between matter andthe dead"!)cause." v. 13. He applies this canon to his ownnature :ef atV/wSou? K. V\LKOV awea-r^ica, and toeverything that vii.happens. 29 :Tvwpio-ovTO. . .crv/jL/Balvov. Aie\e K. pepio-ov TO viroKeifjievov et?TO an-twSe? K. v\ucov. This is the kind of questionone must ask oneself. viii. 1 1 :Tovro, TL e. avroK,a& avro rfj ISia /caraa-/cV7j ; TL [lev TO oucrf-wSe?avTOv K. V\IKOV ; TL Be TO a/rtcoSe? ; TL Be iroiel ev T<OK6cr/JL(p ; iroaov Be %povov vfylcrTaTai ;So xii. 8 :yvfjiva TWV (f)\OLO)v OedaaaOai ra airuoBq, Ta? dvafyopasTWV Trpdgecov. ("Stripoff the husks and look at theunderlying causes, look at the tendencies of actions.")

""""258 MARCUS AURELIUSviii. 13 :AIJ)VK&<$ K. eVt irdarj^ (el olov re) <f>avracrlas^ucnoXoyeiy 7ra0o\oyelv ia\eicTt,Keve(r6ai, whereRendall very suggestively:To every impression apply,if possible, the tests of objective character, of subjectiveeffect, and of logicalrelation." The passageis not easy ;<f>vo-io\oyeiv (a word of significant frequency in laterbooks) clearly conveys peculiar and special nature orequipment," iSia Karacr/cevr}, by no means a detailedinquiry into composition and parts by scientific andimpartial induction, but rather a deductive pronouncement on its place in the world, viewed in the lightof the prescribed teleology ; 7raOo\oyelv would imply<j)v.the actual experience of such a creature or thing(for is ideal and abstract), the particular concreteaction of the rest of circumstances uponit and itschange under such influence ;$ia\eKTiKevecr6ai, thebroadest term for reflecting survey, ascending fromsuch experience or inward sensations and emotions tothe more abstract definition or ideal contained in theterm<f>vcri,$;in a word, a combination of the twofirst. viii. 5 2 (a passage already quoted):He whoknows not the world-order, knows not his own placetherein. And he who knows not for what end heexists, knows not himself nor the(world." O Se evTi TOVTCDV ttTToXtTTGOZ ,OV&6 77/90?TL dVTO? 7TG(f)VKVelTroi. He uses this canon to reprove his own desireof applause from those about him ignorant of theirplace and destiny. ix. 25 : "lOi eVt rrjvroO Alrlov K. CLTTO rov vKiKov avrb TrOeacrac elra K. rov ^povov Trepiopicrov, oaov Tr\ela"rovTOVTO TO t 6Yo>9 TTOLOV. Get to thev(f>io-TacrOai 7T6(f>vfcecause and its quality isolate it from the material;embodiment and survey it; then delimit the full

""""""""""THE TWO NATURES 259span for which the individuality in question cansubsist."(Of. viii. 21 :eico-TpetyovK. Oeaaat, olov e.yrjpdcrav e olov yiverai.)10. Full of the practical tendency of objectivestudy, Marcus always sees things in the light of apersonal relation to himself. As to him death is theconstant theme of his solitary parsenetic, so in allelse he aims at reducing a thingto its constituentelements, and fixing the utmost limits for its persistence, that the supreme lesson of universal decaymay be derived. To ISta? TTOLOV exactly correspondswith our individuality ; questionable and puzzlinggift in a pantheistic system, and reaching in man apoint most difficult of solution. He quotes withapproval Epicurus, in his resolute contempt of suffering.ix. 41: "When I was sick I did not converseabout my bodily ailments, nor discuss such matterswith my visitors ;butcontinued to dwell upon theprinciples of Natural Philosophy" (ra TrporjyovfjLeva(j)vo-io\oywv SiereXovv), and, more particularly, howthe understanding, while participating in such disturbances of the flesh, yet remains in unperturbedpossession of its proper good" (77 Aidvoia, (Tvfji^6Ta\a/jLftdvovcraT&V ev crapKiBiQ)TOIOVTCOV Kivrjcrewv, drapaicTelrb iSiov a^aQov rypovcra). Like Seneca, he is tolerantof the foe, fas est et ab hoste doceri," and seeks thecommon ground of all earnest and reflecting thoughtis it to every school(irdcr^ alpeaew KOIVOV) common ;to be loyal to philosophy under whatsoever circumstances, and not join the babel of the sillyandignorant (/u^Se TO) ISuarr) K. d^uorioXoyw GVfjbtyXvapeiv).x. 9. He unites this scientificorwinnowing and discerning facultyknowledgewith simplicity,

""260 MARCUS AURELIUSdignity : Tlore yap d7r\OTr)Tos aTroXavcret? ; Trore(Tefjt,voTr]Tos ; TTOTC 8e rrjs efi etcdcrTov ryvcDplcrecos, rlre e. /car ovcrlav, K. riva %(t)pav e%ei ev T> KOCT/AW,K. eirl TTOGOV 7re<f)VKev v^lo-racrdai, K. e/c rivcov crvyice-KpiraiK. TLCTL Svvarai,K.virdp%ei,v, rives ovvavrcuavTo BiSovai re K.a^aLpelaOai. That true under("standing which apprehends each thing s true being,its position in the world, its term of existence, andits composition, which can say to whom it of rightbelongs, and who can either giveit or take itaway.")11. x. 18: Els eicao-TOV ra)v VTTO/ceifjievGW efacrrdvTa,eirivoelv avro 77877 StaXfo/u-ei/ov K. ev /jieTa/3o\fj. . . rj tcaOort, eicacrTov Tretyv/cev axrTrep Ovtfcr/cew (" byits own appointed mode of death This").physiology,"then, comprises a study of ingredients and of fated dissolution ;not only for the Sage s own life, but for eachmaterial object Philosophyisaxi. 1. Even the scientific astronomyMeditation on Death."of the EationalSoul, on which Seneca expatiates with such luxuriance,is but a means to view the monotony and sameness ofthe universe, whether in parts or : "Enprocess $eTrepiepxerai rbv 6\ov Koafiov K. TO Treplavrov icevovK. TO cr^rj/jia avrov, K. els rr]V dnreipiav rov alwvoseKTeiverai, K. rrjv TrepioSiKrjv TraXiyyeveo-iav T&V 6\cov. . .6eo)pel : the moral being, not the splendid prerogative of the Soul who out of this mortal abyss can riseto stellar spheres, but the fragility, the caducity, ofeach thing (itself included) ; that poorcomfort whichconsoles the brevity of lifeby dwelling on its emptiness. xi. 16 :Indifference, the true philosophic aim,thus to be attained :ASicufroptfcreiSe eav eKacrrov avrwvOecopfj Siyprjfjievcos K. (firj 1) oXt/coG?(" bycontemplating

"1Coraes here conjectured the negative ;both would make good sense ;""THE TWO NATURES 261everything in its elements, and also as a whole").1xi. 1 7 :7ro6ev eXrfKvOev e/caarov tc. /c TIVWV etcaarov viroKeifJLevtovK. 6t9 Ti flTa{3d\\l, K. OiOV (7Tai fJiTa/3a\OV K. ft)? OV&6VKCLK.OV Trelaerai. The supposed scientific interest isthus strictly ancillary to the moral and personal end.The study of things tends to show that they must soonperish and die, and in this law of nature suffer no hurt.And so for man :his duty, to appropriate to himselfthe general lesson, and learn patience and lowliness.Consider from whence each thing has come, of whatmaterial it iscomposed, into what it is changing, what itwill be like when changed, and that no harm can cometo it." xii. 24. Of three "dogmas"to be always heldready to hand, the second is to see oirolov etcao-rovOLTTO(TTrepfjiaTOS ^e^pi ^i^wc-eft)?K. airofAeXpi TOV rrjv tyw%r)V cnro&ovvai, K. ef oiW rjK. et? ola 77Xwcrt?. Thus, in a sense, philosophy performs by anticipation the work of death, showing theconstituents, unweaving, like Penelope, the texture ofdaylight in the gloom of an ascetic wisdom. We26Xi/cws might be used of vague superficial dismissal of a thing under itsclass without due disregard to its "differentia." But the word occurs ina good sense just below xi. 18 (9) of pointing out to someone in error ageneral law and I feel sure Kendall is ; right in a verdict of exile ;for6Xi/ccDs corresponds exactly with <f>v(rio\oyia,and 8. to the close inspection of tradoXoyta, and analysis into elements.2 Before dismissing this section I may remark on the three remaininguses of (frvaioXoyew:(a) Clearly scornfully of the supposed esoteric knowledge of Heraclitus, which could not save him from an indecorous fate(iii. 3 : irepi TTJS TOV Ko<r/*ou e/cTri puxrews roffavra <|>v<rioX.oYii<ras); (/3) ina doubtful passage, x. 9 : "Afight, a scramble, a stupor, or a bondagesuch is life ! and each day will help to efface the sacred principleswhich you divest of philosophic regard or allegiance" (ra iepa tKeiva56y/J,a,Ta biroaa. ov ^vo-ioXo-ynruis favrdfyK. TrapaTr^Trets). Gatakerreads which is the same thing. The Teubner text,a<pv<jt.o\oyr,Tus t

0X0777x65,"""262 MARCUS AURELIUSmayconclude this section with his own definition(already quoted above), v. 32 TLS ovv tyvx:K. irurnr)pai ; clSuia97 ap^rjvK. reXo?, K. TOV Siovaias SirjKOvra TOV Aoyov, K. Sia TTCLVTOS TOVKCITO,TrepioSovs TeTdyfjievas oiKOVo^ovvTa TOUdv. What soul is trained and wise ? That(" onlywhich knows the beginning and the end, and theKeason diffused through all being, which through alleternity administers the universe in periodic cycles.")Here, as must always be the case in pantheistic systems,the particular knowledge of details gives place in theend to a mere consideration of the inbreathing andoutbreathing of Brahm," the illusion of all severalexistences, and the mystic sense of union with thealpha and omega of life. Science, properly so called,cannot flourish in a mind preoccupied with its ownsorrowful personality, and centring its thoughtduty (and the uselessness) of moral endeavour.on the(D) ON REBELLION AND APOSTASIS FROM THE WORLD-ORDER HOW FAR POSSIBLE ?ANALYSIS12. Has man only just so much freedom as to understand hisslavery ?Rebellion is possible, but only hurts the rebel.6 must be in ironical<f>v<ri apposition, "whichyou, the selfdeemedaccurate student of things, call up before your minds in arrayand then dismiss," i.e. without practising. (There is a temptation(which I shall resist) of reading something like puffed up with merewords (v. 23 :/xwpds 6 fr TOVTOIS 0uo-c6/Aevos), which a scribe, increasingly familiar with (frvffioXoyta, may have altered.) liapa-jr^Treiv isitself a puzzle; it is used, i. 8, of absolute "disregard";ii. 17, ofthe supreme guidance and "escort" of true wisdom; viii. 57, of the"transmissionof light. I feel certain it is used here like (pavra^ri, ina depreciatory sense, "carelesslybow out."

""""THE TWO NATURES 26313. (Texts on theme, "partor member or limb severed from wholeceases to be".)14. Individual aloofness and want of sympathy can do harm; yet,unlike lopped branch, repentant separatist can reunite (buthe is never the same).15. Appeal based on special affinity and Thought for its kindredand counterpart ; the truly moral one who takes joy in doingright.12. Having now seen the universal law of decay,as the foundation and perpetual theme of philosophy,being aware that to Marcus Science meant a prejudiced and inaccurate meditation on constant elementalchange, we come now to a seemingly different subject,one, nevertheless, closely connected. Is man, doomedwith all else to death, able in any degree to vindicatehis freedom in self-will ? Is he a mere machine withthe painful consciousness that it possesses just so muchspontaneity as to understand its slavery ? l x. 5 :Whatever befalls was fore-prepared for you from alltime ;the woof of causation was from all eternityweaving the realization of your being and that whichf/should befall it." O rt av <TOIav/JL/Saivp rovro cot,e alwvos Trpo/caTeafcevd^eTo Kal r) eTriTrXo/crj rwv alriwvavv6ic\a)0 rrjv re <jr)V vTroarao-Lv e% alBiov K. rrjv TOVTOV(jv^ftaeiv. No wonder Quietism follows as the solepractical maxim of prudence : obedience to fixed law,tinctured, if you like, with a sentimental pietism, ormaking a virtue, resignation, of necessity. Clearly allrebellion of particulars must be fictitious "for who:hath resisted His will ?There is but one force in1 ii. 16 : T<fAosd\oyiK&v f&uv, TO eTreadai. ry rijs IT6Xeajs K. IIoXtTe/asr?}s Trpecr/Surdrr/s \6yy K. :dea^ an insurmountable Dualism of subjectand object, unless religious faith come to reinforce the duty, by showingthe happiness, of obedience.

""He"""""Man"264 MARCUS AURELIUSthe world, whatever its name and character, whether itbe mere physical impulse, or (in some way unintelligibleto the ordinary man) moral and making for righteousness." To oppose this were madness if it were notfrankly impossible. Yet Marcus isconstantly urgingus not to attempt it : he is very anxious, perhaps overanxious, to show that it can only harm the rebel himself, and cannot hinder God s work, to whom even sinand Satan are contributory and essential.s souldoes violence to itself first and foremost when it makesitself so far as it can a kind of tumour and excrescenceon the universe" 16:(ii. Yftpi&i eavrrjv f)rov d.Ta fj,ev orav dirooTirjfAa K. olov rov<f>Cfxa(oaov eft avr<p) yevrjrai).Anychafingagainst the order of things is a rebellion againstNature (dirooTao-is r/79 $v<rea)9).For man is a merepart (iv. 1 4 ^Evvn-ecrr^ : &>?/J,epos).iv. 29: "If hewho does not recognize what is in the world is astranger to the universe, none the less is he who doesnot recognise what is passing there (f ef09 KOO-^OV . . .ra ovra . . . rd yivopeva).is an exile, expatriatedfrom the Commonwealth of Reason ;a blind man withcataract of the mental eye($vyas 6 favycw rov7TO\irifcbv \6yOV, TV(j)\OS 6 KaTdfJiVaiV TO) VOepO) OfAfJLaTi)..." an excrescence who, as it were, excretes andseparates himself from the order of nature by discontent with his surroundings ( ATroorirjfjia icoa/nov 6 afyia--rdfjuevos K. ^(jopi^dov eavrov rov TT}? KOLV^ (frvaecos \6<yov)..." asocial outcast who dissevers his individual soulfrom the one common soul ofXio-jjia/xw ouo-779).reasoning things( Airoo--TroXeew? o rrjv ISlav ^v^r)V T&V \oyi/ca)v a7rocr^/fa)z/,Yet these railers perform a useful function,each has a contributory function to the service of the

"""""""""THE TWO NATURES 265whole ;none are superfluous. Heraclitus believed("sleepers to be epyaral . . . o-vvepyol TWV Iv ra> Koajj,(oyivo^evwv. A\\o$ Be KO,T aXXo avvepyel CKovalas $e K. o /-le/i^o/ue^o?, K. o avTifiaweiK. dLvaiptlv ra yivofjLeva. Kal yap TOV TOLOVTOV6 Kooy/,09 who finds fault, and who tries to resistand undo what is done ;even of such the world hasneed").13. viii. 34 :" Have you ever seen a dismemberedhand or foot, or decapitated head lying severed fromthe body to which it belonged ? (cnn>KKO|Afie nr]v. . .aTTOTeTfjLTjfjLevrjv). Such does a man make himself (sofar as he can) when he refuses to accept what befalls,and isolates himself, or when he pursues self-seekingaction (o /i?)6e\wv TO avpftalvovK. curoaxiwv eavrov).You are cast out from the unity of Nature of whichyou are an organic part you dismember your own;self( Airepptvj/at TTOV Trore CLTTO r?)? Kara fyvaiv evwaecos7T(f)VfCt(f <yap /Liepo?, vvv Se aeavrov aTre/co-^ra?).Buthere is this beautiful provision, that it is in your powerto re-enter the unity no other; part of the whole dothGod privilege, when once severed and dismembered, toreunite(A XX ewSe KO/JL^OV eicelvo OTI efecrrt aoi nrd\ivevwaai, aeawrov. rovro aXXo>pepei ovSevl Oeos eVeTpe-v/re,XwpiaOerrt K. SiaKOireVri trakiv cry^eX^eti/). But considerthe goodness of God with which He has honoured man !He has putit in his power never to be sundered at allfrom the whole (aXXa ack^ai rrjv ^prjcnoTTjra yTeTifj,7]/cerov avOpaiTTOV Kal yap Iva rrjv apfflv f^rjAnd ifdTroppayiff a?ro TOV oXof, eV avra) eirolijcre).sundered, then to rejoin once more and coalesce andresume his contributory place (K. diroppayeWi iraXiv7rave~\,0eiv K.av^vvai K. rrjv TOV pepovs rdfyv a,7ro\a-

""""Among"266 MARCUS AURELIUS1/3elv).he complains that rational beings alone can interruptix. 9. A long and interesting section in whichthis natural law of sympathy and association betweenthe cognate parts of kindred whole : "Oaa KOLVOV TIVO?/jberexei, Trpbs TO 6/jboyeves o-jrevSei,, earth to earth, fireto fire, etc., real TOLVVV Trav TO K0ivr)<$ voepas (f)vo~ec0<;fjieTO^ov Trpo? TO o~v<yyev$ 0/1,0/6)9 <T7rev$ei rj /cal jjia\\ov.in the common(So, too, everything that participatesmind-nature feels the like impulse towards kind, naymore so(6V<w jap e. tcpelrTov trapa TO, a\\a,K. TrpbseToifjLOTepov.impulsepart ").TO,awyicipvao OaL TO> olieeiq) K.The higher the nature, the readier theto combination and fusion with its counter. . . EvOJJS yOVV 67TL fJL6V TWV oXojCOV Vp07]o-/jLrjvr) K. aye\ai, . . . K. olov epwTes ^w^al yap 77877("rjaav evTavOa K. TO (rvvdyayyov ev TO>KpeiTTOVi eVt-Teivopevov evpio~K6To on this higher plane of beinga mutual attraction asserts itself, which is not presentin plants (!),or stones, or sticks").^Eirl Be TWV\oyifcwv %(pu>vvroXtretat K.<j>i\taev TroXe/i-ot? crvvOfj/cai, K.avowal.K. olicoi K. <rv\\oyoi K.rational1 On no point is Marcus clearer than on the absolute freedom ofchoice, at any given moment, whatever previous life and habits mayhave been, whatever the seeming tyranny of circumstance : it is"instantaneous conversion," but the prime mover is not God, butman : oi)5eis 6 KU>\VUV,ii. 9 ;rts 6 /cwAiW ^/c/3aAetV ;xii. 8 and 25, viii.47 ;rts 6 KW\IJUV dtopduaai.; x. 32 and 33, ix. 11. In viii. 41,TCI. rovvov i 5ta ovdeis <5t\Xos e lwdev ^fATrodt^eiv. ovdeis yap 6 dvayKacruv . . .Trapa^TJvaL, v. 10 iii.; 12, ovdeis 6 TOVTO (ev^weiv) Kco\vcraL dwd/nevos.Even Bartholomew Toyner could scarcely express himself more emphatically on this inalienable prerogative (though he may be morepicturesque) I tell you it s a love that s awful to think :of, that willgo on giving men strength to do wrong, until through the ages of Hellthey get sick of it, rather than make them into machines that wouldjust go when they re wound up, and that no one could love (The ZeitGeist, by L. Dougall).

"""""""THE TWO NATURES 267beings there are societies and friendship, homes andand armistices."communities, and in wars, compactsETTI O TO)V 6TIKpeiTTQVWV, KOI SlseO TTJKOTCOV TQOTTOVTiva CVGHTI? vTrearr) oia eVt TWV aarpcov. In the stillhigher orders of being, even among distant bodies, thereexists unity of a kind, as among the Stars." OVTCOS fj7rl rb icpelTTov eTravdpacrt,? o-vjMTrdOeiav /cat ev SieaTUHTivepydcrao-OcuBvvarat.So that ascent in the scale ofbeing induces sympathetic action, in spite of distance.See what we come to then. None but things possessedof mind ignore the mutual impulse of attraction ;hereonly does the natural gravitation disappear (jMova ravoepa vvv eVtXeX^o-Tat TT}? TT^O? dXX.rjXa aTrov&fjs K.crvvvevo-ews, K. TO avppovv wSe povov ov ySXeVerat).Yes, but even in the act of evasion, men are caughtand overtaken ;nature prevails. Watch and you willsee ;sooner will you find some particle of earth detached from other earth, than man isolated from manTrpoo-aTTTO/jievov iJTrepiKaTcika^avovTai KpaTel yapevpot rt9 av 7e<w8e9TavOpwrcov dvOpcoirov14. An almost similar reproof of the exceptionalobstinacy and frowardness of the intellectual naturexi. 20. All other elements in obedience know how tokeep their place (TreiOofjieva TJJ TOJV o\wv SiaTd^et . . .apa /cal ra GToi^eia vTraicovei rot? oXot? . . .av eiceWev Trakiv TO evSocrijtov r^? SiaXvo-ewspersistently retain their appointed place,until the signal for dissolution sounds their release. Fieon it that your mind-element alone should disobey anddesert the post assigned (ov Sewov ovv jibvov TO voepbvo~ov yitepo? aTret^e? elvai K,.dyavaxTeiv Ty eavTov

"""""You"""""268 MARCUS AURELIUSYet no violence is laid upon it, nothing but what isin accordance with its nature ; yet it breaks awayimpatiently. For motions of injustice, intemperance,anger, vexation, fear are simply a rebellion againstnature (ovbev d\\o e. rj d^iorafjieVou TT)? (^vcrea)?).So ix. 23: are part of a social whole, a factornecessary to complete the sum (TroXm/cou avo-rij/jLaro^crv/jLTrXrjpcoTifcos). Any action of yours that does nottend directly or remotely to this social end dislocateslife and infringes its unity (^ e^y rqv avafyopav etreTrpoae^uts eire TroppwOev eVt TO KOLVCOVLKOV reXo?, avrrjSicumra TOV /3iov K. OVK ea eva elvai). It is an act ofsedition, and, like some separatist, doing what he can tobreak away from civic accord (oTcunuSris e. wo-Trep evo TO Kdff avrov /u/epo? Suorrd/xe^os airb T% TOiavTi]?covias). Here we note the convincing appeal toco-operate in a system which is imperilled or impairedby individual aloofness. The fabric, social or natural,can suffer hurt from such secession, as of the Eomancommonalty to the Aventine but; Marcus, true to hisbelief that evil harms the perpetrator alone/ insistsfar more frequently upon the suicidal folly of suchaction, and the superb indifference of the cosmic process to the rebellion of a part (like some aggrandisedChinese Empire !).We are well aware to-day howfeeble is the appeal to the reason compared with therousing of the sympathetic emotion. Social interestdepends not on fear of a revolution nor on dread ofignorance, but simply and solely upon a sense of Christian duty or a vaguer sense of compassion. Thirtyyears ago the generally accepted maxim was,idle to oppose the march of democracyrather, we are wrong in not usingItis; to-day, it isour efforts to raise

"""("""THE TWO NATURES 269our brother to a better life."Kendall, excellently asalways, expresses Marcus criticism ofdisaffection(Ixxxiv.) ;it was powerless to interrupt or baulkthepurposes of providence, and in opposingit does butbecome fuel to the flame, feeding and strengtheningwhat it essays to check and counteract." But themoral appeal depends on showing man how much, nothow little, influence he exerts for right or wrong.Another picturesque passage (xi. 8) recalls the Paulineallegory of the wild olive-tree : /cXaSo? TOV 7rpocre%ot)9K\d$ov aTTOKcmels ov Svvarat, pr) K. TOV o\ou<f)vrovfOf TO) Srj tealavdpWTros ez/o? dvOpwjrov<xiroKKo<|>0ai.diroaxto-Oels 0X779 Trjs /coivcovias aTTOTreTrrcoKe a branchlopped from its neighbour branch is inevitably loppedalso from the main trunk !So, too, a man isolatedfrom one of his fellow-beings is severed from thegeneral fellowship The"). only difference is that inman s case his is the voluntary wrong and hurt, act ofmalice prepense. K\d$ov pep ovv aXXo9 aTTOKOTrrei, a.Be atro9 eavTOV rov TrXrjoriov x w P^ l piG^a-asK. diroarpa<j>eis, dyvoel Se on K. TOV o\ov TroXtrei/yLtaTO? a/^adiroTeT^Kev eavrbv. He follows this by a similar remark on the gracious gift of God which allows thiswrong to be repaired and annulled in a moment at thesinner s will :IlXrjv eKeivo -ye Swpov rovT7]V K.OIVWVLCLV A LOS. e^ecrTL yap iraXivTOO irpoaeveiKOL 7rd\iv TOV o\ov (7But thanks be to Zeus who knits the<yevea-0aLbond of fellowship it is in our power to coalesce once;more and recomplete the whole." Yet Marcus addshere a significant epilogue: It becomes more andmore difficult for the morose and sullen separatisttoattach himself again to the parentstem." Here alone,

""""We""270 MARCUS AURELIUSperhaps, does our author seem aware of the limits tohuman freedom of choice in our constitution, our predisposition of accumulated past habit. HKeovdias("YetyevofjLevov TO Kara rrjv roiavTrjv Siaipecriv,K. SvcraTro/cardo-TaTov TO cnroxwpoui/ Troiel.constant repetition of the severance makesreunion and restoration difficult for the separatist. )T6 ov% ofjioios o tfXaSo9 o drf dp^i)? avpB\a-K.<7V/jL7rvov<$ (TVfjL/JieLvas, TO) /u-era rrjv diroKoirT)i/av6i<$eyKevTpKrOevTi. The Branch which is(" part ofthe original growth, and has shared the continuous lifeof the tree, isnot the same as one that has been loppedoff and reingrafted.")15. After his eulogy of the ordered submissionand loyalty of the elements in the above passages, weare startled (or might be ifby this time we did notknow Marcus easy shifting of emphasis and turn ofmetaphor) to find that only the rational nature hastrue inward communion, denied to the world of inanimate objects. The other constituents of the variouswholes (light, substance, soul) possess neither sensenor mutual relationship (dvaicrOrjTa K. dvoLKeicora d\\tf-Xot?). But . . . thought tends ... to its counterpartand combines with it, and the instinct of communitydeclinesdisunion(Aiavoia Se Ibico? eVi TO Ofji6(^v\ovreiverai K. GWicrTaTac K. ov SieipyeraiTO KOIVU>VIKQVTrdOos). xii. 30. This series may fittingly be closedby a quotation (vii. 13) which shows not only thefellowship of the rational natures, but the stages on thepath of its appreciation are one;body, and hewho uses of himself the term part (pepo?) instead oflimb (//,e\o9), the more organic connexion, has not yetattained the true inward satisfaction of brotherly love ;

"HowTHE TWO NATURES 271he obeys Law as Law, but has no conception of theharmony of the gospel, in which duty to others andpleasure to self are inextricably interwoven. Olove<7Tiv ev rjvwfjLevois TCL /jie\7) TOV<7&>/itaTO9,TOVTOV e^etTOV \o<yovev SLO~TCOO~L TO, \oyifca 7rpo$ fjiiav Tiva"avvepjiav KaTedKevacrfjueva. (E. As in physical:organisms the unity is made up of separate limbs, soamong reasoning things the reason is distributed amongindividuals, constituted for unity of co - operation.Md\\ov $e aou r)TOVTOV vor]o~is 7rpoo~7recreiTai eav TrposaeavTov TroXXa/a? \eyrjs OTL MEAO2 el/M TOV etc TWVXoyi/coov o-vo-Trj/jiaTos. ("Thisthought will strike morehome ifyou constantly repeat to yourself, I am amember of the sum of reasoning things/ Eav 8e")MEPO2 elvai aeavTov \eyys OVTTO) arro Kapia<; c^tXet?TOU9 av0pw7rovs. If (" you substitute meros for melospart for member you do not yet love men from yourheart/ ) OVTTCD ae K,aTa\ f r)KTiicw<$ evcfrpalvei TO evep-Trotet?" OVTTCO &>?o-avTov ev TTOIWV.ryeTelv crt, co? irpeTrov avTo tyikbvYou have yet no certitude of joy(" in doing kindnesses ; they are still bare duty, not yet agood deed to We add this yourself.")passage here notonly because it shows man s power of gradually realizingthis sense of community (a necessary corollary to ourpresent study, can he set himself against it 1"),but also because it points out in a profounder spiritthan any other phrase or sentence of Marcus, perhapsof any ancient philosopher, the common root of altruismand egoism, so-called. The perfect man, who is trulyblest, is not he who does right from a sense of duty,but who takes so much pleasure in his benevolencethat he cannot do otherwise, and will not count thecost.

GENERAL CONCLUSIONGENERAL SUMMARYPurpose ; to disclose lurking antinomies in any monistic hypothesis ;Aurelius substitutes religion for science ,but in every section theundying conflict of the two is brought to light ; Plotinus has farmore logic, conviction, coherence ;Stoicism (as a creed) an entireanachronism, impossible to revive ;Submissiveness and Pietismuncongenial to modern thought ; nothing more out of date thana divinizing of the Actual; society and the universe run ondistinct lines; defiance, discovery, personality, note of Westernthought.Aurelius attracts us by his earnest inconsistency; marks the end ofmoral confidence and moral effort ; alleged affinity between manand the world has disappeared (Kendall s excellent appreciation) ;certain questions raised by the doctrine and experience of theStoic school.A FRESH volume on the philosophy ofMarcus Aureliusmay well seem superfluous. Few characters in theImperial age are so well known ;few phases of Greekor Roman thought and religion are more familiar.That complex of curious belief, odd presumption, andscientific dogmatismcalled the Stoic School lends itselfexcellently to eloquent summaries ;for at first sight itsoutlines seem remarkably clear and well defined, itsdoctrines coherent and symmetrical. Every history,either of Rome, of ethics, or of pure philosophy, finds272

GENERAL CONCLUSION 273the task of appreciative and sympathetic treatment aneasy one. It is difficult not to admire, and Marcussecret memoirs will never be without interested readers.In Dr. Kendall s recent volume has appeared not merelyby far the finest version of the original in English, butan introductory essay on the tenets of the Porch full ofpower, grasp, delicacy of expression, and accuracy ofdetail. With his kind permission I have made use ofthis translation to explain the excerpts through thebook. It would be presumptuous and impertinent toattempt to improve it, and almost impossible for onefascinated by its style and rhythm to become independent enough to forget it, or original enough toit.supersede What is true of all translations isespecially true in the case of a version of MarcusAurelius, however beautiful ; imperceptibly the emphasis is lost, the lesson of the repetition of certainwords, the atmosphere evaporates, and one is astonished to find how different is the impression of twentyconsecutive lines of the Emperors actual words andthe same amount in his English translators. This isunavoidable, and there can be no question that Dr.Kendall has best appropriated and reproduced the spiritand the temper of the original.But a sense of this hasled me to adopt the somewhat cumbrous method ofverbal quotation, which may deter an impatient reader.Yet it is peculiarly suitable in the case of an authorwho, though he writes with preconceived notions andprejudices, never develops his argument in a long series,never advances to a climax, and expresses his thoughtsin disconnected aphorisms, all illustrative of an immovable main thesis. It is the purpose of the volume, notso much to seize these salient axioms and obvious18

"""274 MARCUS AURELIUSsyllogisms which are taken for granted in every criticismof the Emperor s faith or character, as to show thelurking antinomies, doubts, anxieties which lay beneaththis stern postulate of Monism ;to disclose the innerconflict between those two ultimate and irreconcilablerivals Science and Faith.The early School, like all Greeks, fascinated into anunwarrantable teleology, had been in a way lazily anddeductively scientific, or, let us say, avowedly unand unbiassed seekers afterselfish, objective, impartial,truth," organs of impersonal reason while no fact is;clearer than the intense preoccupation of reflecting mindswith their own salvation and peace, than the subjectivitywhich was then prevalent. In Rome the latter sideincreased in prominence with the decaytion, and the ambitious Egoism which emerged from thenominal subordination of part to whole. The WesternStoics clung with devotion to a theoretical doctrinewhich in practice they surrendered. Religious faithcame to the rescue of the unhappy personality whichdemanded a guarantee and correspondence in the obof civic sancjective world to the moral endeavour ;which is thestanding puzzle not only once upon a time in bygoneantiquity, but of all earnest minds in any age. Thewhole question of science and faith centres roundthe question of a personal or impersonal hypothesis ofthe Universe. Stoicism, while accentuating the agoniesand acute self-consciousness of the Spirit, maintainedthe latter with the strongest resolution.It retained thenames of deities disguised as physical forces, with whichmen could no longer come into close personal relation.Meantime introspection and self-analysis became thefashion ;and men really desired to attain, not truth, but

"""GENERAL CONCLUSION 275a way of life, and guidance in the slender practicalsphere which, like Balzac s Peau clewaschagrin,"almost daily dwindling.The result might have been foreseen. With everincreasingemphasis the religious aspect of the world issubstituted for the scientific, a personal for an impersonalinterpretation of the facts of life. The Emperor, inparticular, combines sincerest belief in the gods withtheoretic acceptance of a crude materialism. In theapparent harmony of his system, symmetrical if depressing, there is a perpetual conflict of elements whichcannot be reconciled. It for is, example, impossible tosay whether his Pantheism is objective and physical, orhighly idealist and subjective whether he deifies or;denies the external world ;whether man s affinity toGod was in virtue of his fatal place in the inextricableseries, or his dim, faint power to protest (standing outside not, indeed, as a new cause, but as a critic, hurriedon by the rush which he may estimate but cannotavoid). The utter illogicalityof moral effort in such aworld has in the foregoing pages been exposed in perhapswearisome iteration. Marcus had many teachers besidesStoicism for the practical duties of social and imperiallife ;and we may blame the dogmataof the Schoolif he seems to us to be too ready to acquiesce, toopatient of evil and tolerant of faults which it perhapswas in his power to correct. Stoicism is the refugeof a sensitive and discouraged nature, and the finalSource of life takes the features of a personal deity inthe unsatisfied craving for sympathy. The transition tothe purer and more genial mysticism of Plotinus is easyand assured : save that in this later system thereis more coherence, symmetry, and system. Dualism,

"276 MARCUS AURELIUSinherent in the Porch, almost disappears inthe warmerlight of Plato s sun, luminary of the two worlds ofintelligence and of nature.It is useless to repeat with tedious repetition theapparent commonplace (in truth, a paradox) that thispeculiar attitude is a permanent posture of the inquiringSoul, or is likely to reappear to-day as the final creed ofScientific Monism. Nothing is more improbable. Theconditions are absolutely reversed. The so-called religion of Stoicism is a vague, misty, and poetic attemptat self-deception ; the worship of law (as Epicurusacutely reminds) is never likely to take the place ofa personal relation. It reposed on two astoundingpostulates, which for a modern mind (nurtured onpositive science, yet prejudiced in favour of moralbehaviour)it would be impossible to revive withcogency (1) belief in the beneficent : teleology ofNature ; (2) duty of submission. Pantheism is badscience and meaningless religion. It obscures the impassive survey of natural phenomena with the phantomsof superstition, and combines a misplaced and unreasoning reverence for the total of things, with an almostvindictive hatred of its parts. While it haunts naturalinquiry with antiquated religious taboo," it extinguishesreligious feeling and the higher emotions, or conjures upa semblance of love for a supposed god, who is eithersleeping or drunken, in any case, unconscious, and inany true sense unapproachable. There is not theslightest doubt that Epictetus and Marcus did alike, bythis violent clashing of anomalies, find supreme satisfaction ;and that for their practical life an intellectualPantheism (God as Thought), or a dutiful acceptance(outside the study) of the Eoman (t Olympus," provided

""GENERAL CONCLUSION 277consolation, and even, in a lethargic way, encouragement. But the inconsistencies are too patent ; and, inthe end, theory cannot long be divorced from practice.The moral instinct of man repudiated an alliance withthe Porch, and found reinforcement in the sobriety ofthe Christian Church, or in the flattering visions ofPlatonism.To-day we approach the study of an objective worldfree from all religious presupposition. Above all, wehave abandoned the precarious assumption of teleology.The deus ex machind, present at every turn in Stoicism,in spite of its pretension to pure science, is rightlydiscarded. Neither do we study Nature in order toobey her, as if it was the Divine will; but, as truefollowers of Bacon, by obeying to overcome and toemploy."Nothing is further from our designs than any premature deification. The modern spirit is that of St.Christopher ;and if it be conscious that in the moralrealm of effort there is a power distinct from, and insome sense antithetic to, Nature, it will not engrossitself in sentimental devotion to mere blind force. Nolower substitute will satisfy. The notion of God allreligion is an asylum against the injustice or inequalities of the natural order. To entangle, again, thisideal in the meshes of the visible, or evaporate it in thefog of theabsolute," isan insult to human discernment.The submissive yet defiant Stoic temper is one which,save in rare and unhappily dowered individuals, cannever recur in Europe so long as we can preserve anacute sense of personal value and freedom, imperilled asit isby Indian asceticism and absorption, and theinsidious advance of listless or scholarly indifference.

"1Vide Renan, Averroes and Averroism, p. 167 sq. (2nd edit. 1861) ;"278 MARCUS AURELIUSThe ways of the Social order and of the Universe liedifferent planes. Man, as Huxley saw,onis far more thechild of the former ;he owes comparatively little to thesecond ;and it is certain he will rather use, transform,and investigate it for his own purpose and interest thanprofess readiness to acceptwill.all that betides as God sIt is affection rather than admiration which isevokedby the character and the self-revelation of Marcus.We love him because of the transparent anomalies ofhis beliefs, his unsuccessful attempts to co-ordinate twoentirely opposed theories of the Universe. 1 Had hebeen less sincere, more academic and symmetrical, lessbold in the wager of faith,"he could not have exacteda homage so unwavering from all subsequent times.First and foremost, a Eoman emperor, a soulnaturallythe two treatises of Ibn Rosclid, On the Harmony of Religion withPhilosophy, and, On the Demonstration of Religious Dogmas.Philosophyis the most elevated aim of human nature ;but few can attain it.Philosophical disputes are rightly prohibited, because they unsettle thesimple. For their happiness, it suffices to understand what they canunderstand. "The special religion of philosophy is to study thatwhich is : for the most sublime worship one can render to God is theknowledgeof His works which leads us to know Himself in all Hisreality. The vilest action in the sight of God is to tax with error andvain presumption him who adores Him by the best of all religions.All positive tenets of religion (angels, prophets, prayers, sacrifice) aremere expedients to excite to Virtue, which the philosopher alonefollows without ulterior inducement. He must not despise the simplebeliefs in which he was reared ;but interpret them in the best sense.He is a heretic, and justly liable to the penalties prescribed, whoinspires the people with doubts on religion, and displays the contradictions lurking in the Prophets.. . . The wise man does not permithimself a word against the Established Religion. . . and the Epicurean,seeking at a blow to destroy religion and virtue, merits the sentenceof death."

""""mamGENERAL CONCLUSION 279Christian," he is, partly by accident, partly by conviction, a Stoic philosopher, that is, amalgam ofprofoundest idealism, mere positive science, and somepopular belief. He is the last interpreter of thispeculiar phase of thought. Not that men had becometired of the moral effort (for we cannot if we would ridourselves of it),but because they demanded (andobtained ?)a closer correspondence in the life of Godto the aspiration and the hopes of the finite creature.In the close and sympathetic survey of Dr. Eendall,there is much I should like to notice with specialattention. How admirable is this passage ! xxvi. :Belief in Cosmos, not in Chaos, is an intellectual, andstill more, a moral necessity, out of which reason canonly argue itself on pain of self-confusion without; it,motive and justification, or rather excuse, for continuedand inexistence fails." Yet we may add how vaguecomplete was the supposed Cosmic order of the Stoics,and how far remote was it from any moral scheme.In xxxviii. the dogmasof the Cynic School, . . .firmly embedded in the Stoic creed,"are clearly defined :The identification of virtue with knowledge, the autocracy and indivisibility of virtue, and the moral independence of the individual." Again, xl. "The : Cynicsgave unconditional authority to the criteria of individualexperience and will. These were direct, imperious, andvalid. . . . Life in agreement with Nature was thesummary of their aim, and was a formula wellcalculated at once to attract and to mislead disciples."xlvi. :Keturn to Nature, so far from implying reversionto animalism, and the reduction of man s needs to thelevel of the beasts, was found to involve fundamentaldifferentiation of reasoning man from the unreason of

"280 MARCUS AURELIUSthe brute or the inertia of matter, to place man on ato summon himunique spiritual plane, and eventuallyfrom individual isolation to conscious brotherhood withkind and harmony of will with God. These are theelements of Stoicism which have proved most permanentand universal." It might possibly be fair to add that inthis respect the School was but a single manifestationof a cosmopolitan spirit (in the double sense), whichprevailed after the conquests of Alexander :preparing,half-unconsciously,its theoretical arsenal amid the disappointing turmoil of the Diadochi ;and issuing, alikeisChristianity and Roman "Imperialism,"with its twofold current of "justiceto the weaker and the slave,"and the personal rights of man in the great body ofLaw. Perhaps, too, Stoicism only threw out halfformedsuggestions, which were to be realized in theschools of Plato and the Church ; for, as we shall see,the true follower of the Porch never surmounted thisbarrier of isolation, and never issued forth in free andeager enterprise into the larger or the lesser commonwealth.How excellently he expresses the line of thoughtwhich conducted to this lonely watch-tower (7repia)7nj) Ixlviii. :Thus the idea of personality of the ultimateunity of the individual will and conscience, of an Egodistinct from physical organism and environmenteventually dawns upon Greek thought and unexpectedlyreveals a deeper dualism new to philosophy thatantithesis, namely, of spirit and flesh, of man and hismaterial embodiment, of moral aim and realized experience, which conducts to the baffling problems ofDeterminism and Free-Will." There isnothing herewhich contradicts or denies the tendencies of the

"GENERAL CONCLUSION 281Platonic School ;for the contrast there is moreapparent than real, and the co-ordination of spirit andmatter is to be triumphantly achieved in the newSchool of Alexandria, while beneath the nominalmonism of the Porch, the tone of alienation andpessimism is normal and indispensable. Again, Ix. :The monistic core is in constant danger of fallingapart, and needs ingenious buttressing. The unity ofthe world was only explicable as the expression of asingle power, and Zeno ventured to assume that powerto be identical with that which declares itself as consciousness in man." Here, in a word, is the cause ofthe unconvincing and incoherent character of Stoicdogma the attribution of moral aim to the world-;process ; the oscillation between a purely physical anda rarefied moral (or intellectual ?)Pantheism. If wewish to see the significant and essential contrast ofmodern thought, we may look at Maeterlinck s essay("Kingdom of Matter," Contemp. Eeview, Oct. 1900),where, like the Stoic, man holds to his unique andmoral importance; and, unlike him, does so because heis profoundly convinced there is no correspondence."We have learnt at last that the moral world is a worldwherein man is alone ;a world contained in ourselvesthat bears no relation to matter, and exercises noinfluence on it unless it be of the most hazardous andexceptional kind. But none the less real, therefore, isthis world,or less infinite." Which is the most beneficial influence on the special realm of man s nature,history has proved ; whether the arbitrary resemblanceof natural and mental law, or an emphasis on theirintrinsic unlikeness. It is for this reason that I sooften assert that Stoicism can never return as a phase

""282 MARCUS AURELIUSof thoughtitdepends entirely upon an alleged sense;of affinity between man and the world, a deification ofthe concrete which iswholly inconsistent with experienceand discovery, and which isprobably expelled, more orless consciously, from the thoughts of all reflecting men.How well Dr. Eendall expresses the cogency of themoral fact, which precedes moral theory, and is independent of it which condemns to mere idle; triflingthe anti-moral diatribes of Thrasymachus and hismodern imitators ! Ixi. : The old sanction of civicobligation had withered in practice and been expungedin theory, but the survival of morality itself confirmedthe existence of a basis, at once individual and universal. This lay in a common source of energy, not ina mere parity of individual impulse."The empiricalbase, the influence of Socrates and his dialectic, thepuzzling sense of an integral solidarity which yet couldnot be realized, the curious fact that the final argumentfor morality to the Stoics was the personal characterof Epicurus, these points in Stoic dogma cannot bemore lucidly expressed. Nor could we find morestriking definition of the "main than synthesis" this, Ixii. :The world, a complete and living whole, informed andcontrolled by one all-pervasive energy which knewitself in the consciousness of man the microcosm, anddeclared all nature one, coherent, rational." Whetherthe Stoics cordially agreed in this somnambulistic hypothesis of creation, whether the world-spirit first attainsconsciousness in human intelligence, has been muchof moderndisputed ; it clearly forms an essential parttheoretical pessimism, with which, of all Schools,Stoicism has most affinity. No better summary thanthe following could be found of the ethical result

""""GENERAL CONCLUSION 283Ixxiv. :By suppression of desires the moral idealcould easily be reduced to that hard and narrow selfconsistencytowards which the Stoic type habituallyleans;or drill itself or decline into the moral apathywhich results from restricting virtue to the sphere ofintellectual and unimpassioned self-regard. This is thesecret of that accent of futility which marks thethoughts even of a writer so keenly alive to altruisticarid social obligation as Marcus Aurelius." Here is afinal passage on the Stoic claim to spiritual autonomy,Determinism, and free-will, on which to attempt toimprove would be an impertinence ;Ixxxii. : The independence of the Will as a true first principle or dp^ijisincompatible with its identification with the World-Soul. If ... the highest consciousness of man represents the most complete and perfect embodiment of theWorld-Spirit, the saving thought of self-determinationtowards some transcendent, yet unapprehended, harmonyis excluded. Not onlyis man part of the universalpredestination, but the limits of that predestination areknown and absolute."Again, how true and convincing is this summary ofStoic interpretation of the Averts in a larger conception," coloured and permeated with Eastern Monotheism,therefore wavering between naive Phenician worshipof the natural process, and the moral and transcendental Unitarianism of the Jews.Ixiv.(The School,)in ascribing phenomena to the action of mind, attacheda moral instead of a merely mechanical interpretationto each motion of the Universe : an attempt tocombine the immanent and implicit (which tends topurely physical) with the transcendent and Aristotelian,which is then in its abstraction conceived of ratherbe

""""284 MARCUS AUREL1USas Thoughtthan Moral Will." Dr. Kendall uses thehappiest terms in describing philosophic idiosyncrasy ;of Diogenes, xlii. "Towards all externals, his strict:attitude is nonchalance, the charter of his self-of ; Cynics generally, xlv. ":sufficiencyDeaf to thevoices of tradition and culture, determined to isolatethe individual from the society, and to flaunt thesuperiority of will to outer circumstance, the Cynicsfell rapidly into the quagmires of ascetic bravado."-Ixxxiv. : The stalwart braggadocio of Diogenes . .acceptant optimism of Epictetus. . . hard defiance ofCato . . . devout resignation of Marcus," and for ourauthor himself, how deftly and how truly two analogiesof mediaeval and modern date are interwoven in civ. :They are a De Imitatione, such as might have beenpenned amid the isolation of Khartoum."With only two points in this admirable appreciationdo I find myself somewhat diffidently in disagreement.xlix. : It was a cardinal assumption of Stoicism,that nature in man is identical with the nature of theUniverse at large, and on that assumptionit is meaningless to ask whether Cleanthes meant to prescribeaccordance with his own individual nature, or accordance with nature at large.He would have repudiatedthe distinction ;and whatever ethical implication mightresult, at least they would not depend on initialambiguity of But term." I cannot help tracing thevery obvious impotence and unhappiness of the Stoiceffort and outlook to a real though unavowed sense ofthis contrast. I cannot read Diogenes Laertius accountof the Stoics without finding early traces, underneath arigid dogmatism, of a profound conviction of detachment or superiority. Abundant testimonyisprovided

"NoGENERAL CONCLUSION 285in perhaps the largest series of citations from Marcus inthe foregoing pages. To confess this antithesis wouldbe to abandon the whole monistic scheme of things ;butto the end the Stoic philosophy hovered disconsolatelybetween a sense that he, the individual, was the All,and a conviction that he was nothing but himself. Inthe moral realm at least, he derived no encouragementfrom the oft-repeated assurances of sympathy withUniversal order, of conscious unity with the Divine.Nor can I heartily echo his eulogy of the Stoic influence. Ixvii. :system of material monism willpermanently satisfy man s intellectual constitution, . . .but the Stoic attempt, noble, far-reaching, and on itsown lines exhaustive, not merely held for centuries amore active and commanding sway over the mindsand hearts of men than the metaphysics of Plato andAristotle, not merely interwove itself with Christiandiscipline and doctrine, and found philosophic reconstruction in Spinoza but at this day, alike in the poetic;and scientific imagination, enjoys a wider currency andexercises a more invigorative appeal in the field ofnatural religion than anyother extra- Christian interpretation of the Universe."This is too large and important a topic to be treatedexhaustively here; it involves not only a historic surveyover classic and mediaeval times, but a deep insightinto modern sympathy and tendencies, and a candidacknowledgmentof the insurmountable difference ofthe Christian faith to any proposed philosophic substitute. I will content myself here merely withinquiring, by no means anticipating of right a certainanswer :(1) whether there are any sufficient argumentsthat the Stoic School had any serious effect or became

286 MARCUS AURELIUSa guide of earnest endeavour, before its doctrines, empty,eristic, and formal, were translated into activity inRome ?(2) whether the extreme familiarity of thepantheistic hypothesis, the readiness of all men atcertain epochs to accept this, to the Eastern mind, oneand final interpretation, is not responsible alike for thetendencies of the post -classical and Christian development, whether this School is not rather a verysubordinate episode, one of many manifestations of thesense of human brotherhood and the Divine parentageappearing everywhere with the downfall of national orcivic barriers ?(3) whether in all the attempts toreinforce moral effort, or explain the world s unity andsympathy, the special tenets of the School were not byfar the most illogicaland unsatisfactory?(4) whetherEpictetusand Marcus did not derive all their moralvigour or contented submission from a religious instinctand piety, from an alliance with popular superstitions,ifyou will, with which the Porch-materialism wasstrictly incompatible ? (5) whether, except in meretechnical phraseology, such asfrequently strikes one inClement of Alexandria, there could be anything incommon between a system in effect denying personality,human and Divine, and a Church which encouragedthe humblest to believe their efforts in daily life wereacceptable and approved before a loving Father s eyes ?(6) whether the two interpretations of the world arenot fundamentally and diametrically opposed ; as Renanreminds us in a passage before referred to ?(7) whetherthe language used of modern Pantheism is suitable onlyto the epoch anterior to the acceptance of Evolution,and is unintelligible to the scientific explorer of arealm in which he can discern no conscious aim ?(8)

""GENERAL CONCLUSION 287whether we have not at last got rid of the cloudytemper of mind which, confusing veneration and science, 1worship and knowledge, surreptitiously introduces amoral purpose into the workings of mechanical law an;emotional thrill into the cold analysis of the laboratory;a vague mysticism into the survey of the starry heavens 2or the expanse of ocean Such ?questions cannot be finallyanswered here ;itmay suffice now that I have raisedthem tentatively.1 A good instance of this may be seen in Seneca (Nat. Qu. vii. 31) oncomets :"Multa . . .cognata Numini summo,et vicinam sortitapotentiam, obscura sunt . . . oculos nostros et implent et effugiunt ;sive illis tanta subtilitas est quantam consequi acies human a non possit ;sive in sanctiore secessu majestas tanta delituit, et regnum suum (id est,se) regit nee ulli aditum dat nisi animo : he is clearly wavering betweenthe objective and physical, and a mystical and inward Pantheism, theone inevitable result of the profound opposition of the "Two Natures,"which permeates and confuses the whole Stoic development. "RerumNatura Sacra sua non simul tradit. Initiates nos credimus ;in vestibuloejus hseremus ! In his famous definition of God, quod vides totum,quod non vides totum, we see how keenly he feels the antithesis ; how,in spite of his interest in pure science, meteorology, seismology, he isadvancing, like Marcus Aurelius, to a more moral and humanitarianconception of Godhead.2To which Kant, with all his cold sobriety, was not wholly astranger.

"Asy/jiiv).APPENDIXTRANSLATION OF PASSAGES CITED FEOMEPICTETUSCHAPTER ITHE NEW GYNISMB. THE GIFT OP FREE WILL(5)then was fitting, the gods only placed in ourpower the chiefest and sovereign of all (Kpana-rov . . .Kvpivov), the right use of impressions; hut the rest not inour<j>power (OVKWas it that they did not wish to 1For my part, I think, had they been ahle, they would haveplaced these, too, under our control ;but this was altogetherbeyond their power. For, being on earth and bound to sucha body and such partners as we see, how was it possible inthese respects not to be thwarted and hindered by thingswithout 1(TO, KTos).P. 2l8. From this substance (ova-La) of the reverent trustworthy fraternal, who can eject us? Not Zeus Himself.Nor indeed did He wish to, but placed this within my power,and gaveit to me as He possessedit Himself, unthwarted,incapable of constraint or hindrance.288

APPENDIX 289(310) that in which alone one can feel of good courage, thetrustworthy, the unthwarted, of which no man can rob you jthat is, your free will.(330) What has God given me to be really my own, andself-determined? What has He left to Himself? He hasplaced in my hands all matters of free-choice, unhindered,uncontrolled. But this body of clay, how could He makethat free 1 Therefore He ordered beneath the course of theworld (oXwv TreptoSu))all that belongs to me, my estate, myhome and its garnishing, my children, my wife.(361) This Zeus Himself could not do ... persuade allmen what are in truth good and evil things. Has this greatpower of influence been given to thee 1 Be satisfied ;thatalone is bestowed on thee, to persuade thyself.(396) But I know full well whom I must please, towhom be resigned ... to God . He has commended. .(oweoTTjorei/) me to my own charge, and has set under mycontrol alone my free-choice, giving me rules for its employment.(32) If you ask what in me is man good (ayaOov, notrayaOov), I cannot tell you ought else, but a certain stateof Will (TTOIO, Trpocupecris).father has set me free from(65) How can you 1 Zeus myall slavery. Think you He designed to let His own son goforth into servitude? You may be Sovereignbody of mine ;(13) If any can fullytake it and use it at your will.of this deadenter into this article of faith andrealise it as it deserves, that we are all in pre-eminent degreethe children of God, and He is father of gods and men.(pride) But if you recognise that you are child of Zeus,will you not be lifted up with pride ?Since these two things in our birth are strangely mingledand compounded together, body in common with the beasts,reason and judgement with the gods, some turn aside to thislower kinship, ill-starred and corpse-like; and but a few tothat other, divine and blessed.19

"How""Who"2QOMARCUS AURELIUS(33) (seeds) to all things conceived and brought to birthupon the earth, but in chief measure to the reasonable(TO, AoyiKa), because these alone can draw nigh to God ascompanion in familiar converse, knit to Him by reason (a-vv-But shall not this assurance lift us out of our griefsand fears, that we have God as our master and father andguardian ?(49) can one put up with such vexations ?Slave,will you not bear with your fellow-man, who has Zeus for hisfather, who like a son comes from the same bearing seeds anddivine birth as yourself? (avco^ev Kara/JoX^s). Will younot recollect what you are and whom you rule? Kinsmenand brothers by nature s law, offspring of God Himself !(Ordinance) It is to earth you gaze, to this pit of Tophet(ftdpaOpov), to these miserable ordinances of dead men but to;the laws of God, not a thought !(289) Not mourning, not yearning over them as if he leftthem orphans. Well he knew that no man is bereavedof parents, but of all ever and unceasinglyis the heavenlyFather guardian and protector.After (^GXP*- Xoyov)believed that God was hisFather, and so called Him, and performedall his tasks lookingup to Him.(reach) but if a man meet with ill-fortune, remember it ishis own fault ;for God has created all men for happiness, forserenity (evScu/Aoveu/ . . . tvcrraOziv).(311) Shall God be thus indifferent to His handiwork, toHis ministers, to His witnesses ?Whom, indeed, alone Heuses as patterns and models to the unlearned, to prove thatHe is,and well administers the whole world, and is notcareless of human affairs ;and that to the good man, whetherliving or dying, there can befall nothing evil.(338) If vou seized hold of something belonging to him,he would readily renounce it rather than follow on its account.

"6w"APPENDIX 291(fatherland)He knew well whence he has it and fromwhom and on what conditions. But his real ancestors, thegods and his true country,these, etc.never would he have deserted(51) Souls, then, are so bound up and closely attached toGod as being parts and fragments of Him (e^eSe/xeVai K.orwa^etsTO>are CLVTOV /^opia ovam /c.ctTrocrTracryaaTa),and God feels with their every movement and impulse, askindred and familiar to Himself ; by the side of each of ushas He set an overseer (eTurpoTros), the guardian angel ofevery man, and set him on watch, and this a sentinel, everwakeful, that cannot be turned from his duty (Sat/xova . . ."aKOi/xT/rov K. aTra/oaXoyifTTOv).(52) (within) remember never to say, We are aloneyou are not alone, but God is inside with you ;and yourguardian angel is there too.(122) Have I not my seer within (//XXVTIS),who has told methe substance (ovcria) of good and ill ?(Thought) "What then? are not these, too, the works ofGods 1Assuredly, but not in paramount degree (Trpor/yov/xei/a),nor as portions of the gods. But you are in special sense,you are a fragment of the divine (dTroo-Tracr/xa).In yourselfthere is a particle of Him. You know not that you nurtureand train God, you carry Him about with you, wretched man,and do not know it "... when He Himself is present within,surveying all you do and listening.(373) Give to that which rules within youits due even fora brief space. Consider what it isyou have in this powerand whence (^ye/xoi/iKoi/),it has come to you.(117) (your own life)But ifyou deem yourself a part ofsome great Whole, for the sake of this it behoves now tobe sick, to sail, to be in peril,and be brought to uttermostwant, even to die untimely. Why then are you indignant 1(dyavaKTeis). For what is man 1 A component part of aState, first of the City of gods and men, next of that which

292 MARCUS AURELIUSis nearest to the other, which is a tiny copy of the World-Commonwealth .(131) You are a Citizen of the world and a part of it; notone of those who serve, but those who lead. What promisethen must a citizen make? To have no petty interest forhimself alone, to take thought for nothing,as if he weredetached (aTroAvrov).(knowing that) this is allotted from the ordination of theWorld (Scara^ews), and the whole has to be considered beforeits part, and the city before the citizen.(steward) but if he does, the lord will turn and beholdhim acting with haughty arrogance, and will drag him apartand cut him off. Thus, too, it happens in this greater Cityof the world ;for here, too, is there one who is master of thehouse, setting to each severally his appointed duties.(288) This World is a single State, and the substance ofwhich it has been fashioned is one ;and there is need of acertain revolution in things, and one must in his season giveplace to another.(381) "has set his own will and judgment subordinate tohim who guides and disposes the Whole (6Stot/cwv TO, "OXa),as good citizens to the law of their State.It is circumstance that shows what men are made of.(74)When in the future some special crisis befall, remember thatGod, as some stern master in wrestling, has set you to fightwith a stout and vigorous rival (ws dAeiTrnys).that you may become an Olympian victor ;not to pass without sweat.and this comes(272) Is he not fully persuaded that, whatever of thesehe suffers, God istrying and proving his mettle? WhenHercules was exercised by Eurystheus, did he perform allhis tasks with ungrudging cheerfulness ? and when our sageis tested by Zeus Himself, shall he be ready to cry out inpain and show indignation ?(prison) not in hatred ;far be it from that ;for what

APPENDIX 293master hates the noblest of his vassals 1 Nor in indifference ;for not the smallest trifle escapes His watchful care, butexercising them in the arena and using them as a witness andmartyr to the rest of mankind. If I am posted in such anhonourable ministry, shall not my whole life be loyallydevoted to God ?(oAos . . . reVa/xcu).(312) He desires me not to lead a life of idle luxury, nordid He grant this to Hercules His own Son ... but he wasput under strict command, and toiled and was tried as in awrestling school . . . ruler and governor of all land and sea,cleanser of lawless injustice. . . and this task he performed,naked and alone.(290) What good man and true is ever unhappy? Infaith, the governance of this world must be evil indeed ifZeus takes not care of His own Citizens, that like Him, too,they may be blessed.(confused) There is but one path to smoothness of life scurrent ... a steadfast standing-aloof from all that willcannot control, to think nothing one s own, to resign allearthly things to Heaven s will (TrapaSowai TO) ACU/AOJ/UO) or toFortune, and without envy leave as their Stewards thosewhom Zeus has appointed (= the undeserving rich and powerful), but oneself to live in unceasing attachment to one thingonly the unfettered Will which is alone our own (TOJiScwT(3 tt/COjXuTO)).(345) I am ^ree an(* ^ie friend of God, that willingly I mayobey Him.(thisI have?) always ordered my impulse conformably toGod. Does He will me to have fever? I too am willing... I wish to die ... to suffer agony on the rack.(fashion) have "I not, Lord, been careless of thoseopportunities I had from Thee to recognise Thy governmentof the world and to follow it. I have not disgraced Thee... or even murmured or repined. That Thou hast begottenme, I give Thee thanks for Thy gifts. It suffices me to have

"294 MARCUS AURELIUSthus far used Thy benefits. All were Thine, and Thou gavestthem to me." What life is nobler than this? What endmore blessed 1(370) I always will that rather which happens. For Ideem God s will to be preferred to mine. At His feetdo I lay myself, His servant and minister; with Him Idesire, I yearn, I will. CHAPTER II(65) (subject) This is not selfish this is ;the very law ofthe Creature s being for his own sake he does; everything(yeyovc yap ovrcos avrov . . . eyeKo). For this aim guides theSun in heaven, and Zeus Himself. But whenever He desiresto be, God of Rain or Harvest and Father of gods and men,you will see He cannot attain such functions or such titlesunless He be useful for the common interest. Such, then,He made the nature of reasonable beings that they cannotobtain any of their own good things, unless somewhat bebrought forward and applied to the general weal. So to doall for self becomes no longer selfish and ungenerous (a-Koiixo-VYITOV ... TO -rra.vtf aurou eycica Troietv).For what would you1expect that a man should hold aloof from self and from hisown advantage1(cbrooTTj rov . . . iSioos cn;/x<epoi Tos). How,then, is there but one and the same beginning and rule oflife for all creatures, to be friends with self? (17 TT/SOS avraot/ceuocris).(17) (go home) and not disregard things there ;for thatfor the sake of which he has wandered far afield, isnoughtbut this to j study in patience, to remove from his life griefs,"and laments, and cries of alas ! and woe is me !(control ;) Why, then, drag upon yourself things for whichyou are not accountable 1 (dnnrcvflwos) this is but to give;oneself trouble without cause.

""""APPENDIX 295(71) For my nature is to tend to my own good (TT^VKO.irpos TO C/AOV <rv[Ji<t>pov).(l6l) Why are you miserable 1 Why does one thinghappen against your will, and another when you desire itnot to come to pass?Surely this is the strongest proof ofunrest and wretchedness.(this) that he must so fit and conform his desire agreeablyto things that happen, that nothing can take place against ourwill. . . . From this will arise the great boon, we shallnever be aimless, never distressed, but live our span outwithout grief or fear or tumult.(158) As set free from slavery s yoke, dare to look up toGod and say: Use me, Lord, for what Thou wilt in the timeto come. My will is in unison with Thee ;for I am Thine.(335) This is the road that leads to freedom, this the oneriddance of serfdom, to be able from the soul s depths to sayLead me, Zeus, and thou, Fate,Whither my portioned lot shall call."(miserable), trembling at every report, having my easehappiness hanging balanced on other men s lettersand(contempt) Sit there, then, startled and shiveringthis, grieving, unhappy, luckless, hanging on another.at all(306) For the contest set before us is not for some boxingor wrestling match but for very happiness and blessed. . .ness itself.(seek) For what is it that every man seeks 1 To be insteadfast calm, to be happy, to do all as he wishes, not to becontrolled or thwarted.(362) Will you not, giving up all other guides, become yourown master and pupil1(353) Leave all this. Ah, how fair is Athens ! But tobe blessed is fairer still, to be without the disease of passion,to be at rest, to feel that yourlife and its issues lies in noother man s control.

"296 MARCUS AURELIUS(368) What hinders to live lightly and with slackened rein,awaiting with easycheerfulness all that can befall a man ?(Says) I will something, and it comes not to pass ;I amindeed luckless.(Says) I am free from the realm of passion and turmoil !Be not unaware, men, that while you are wallowing in aslough of harass and perplexity about things of little worth, Ialone have won my discharge from all such tumult.(383) You must will it, and the wished-for result is yours ;all is set right (Sicoptfomu). For within is all peril of loss, andhope of succour (ecrw^ej/ . . . aTrwXeta K. /3o?j0ia).(91) This law has God enacted, and says,anything good, get it from thyself.If thou desirest(158) Thou art not Hercules, to cleanse all other men s ills,nor even Theseus to rid Attica ;cleanse thine own things.(245) At once with breathless impatience we want to livelike sages and do good to mankind. What sort of good?what are you about? for have you finished doing good toyourself But ? you want to exhort and advise them ? haveyou succeeded with yourself ? show them in . your own. .case what sort of character the study of true wisdom makes,and don t talk nonsense !(<f>Xvapiv).(Help them by silentexample) eating, drinking, yielding modestly to all, bearingpatiently with all. Help them thus, and do not bespatterthem with thy rheum (/care^epav </>\ey/xa).(266) Eecollect I have a mission I have been sent as God s;herald . . . about things good and bad, to show men howfar they have wandered astray, and seek the substance of thesetwo where it cannot be found.(found) For in good sooth the Cynic is a pioneer (whocomes to tell men what things are friends, what foes, tomankind).(273) The Cynic must not be distracted by divers interests,but must be wholly given up to the ministry which God has

"How"APPENDIX 297entrusted to him, able to pass easily about among men, nottied hard and fast to duties of his own, not caught in thenet of relation (TrpocrSeSe/xeVoi/ KaOrJKova-Lv iSiam/cots or ovSejUTTCTrXey/xeVoi/ (r^ecrecm/) which if he transgress he can nolonger keep up the appearance of the good man and true and;even if he preserve, he shall spoil his character of God spioneer and herald and ambassador.(347) ^ow from henceforth I note carefully what mensay, how they are stirred, and this not from spiteful motivenor to have material for blame or ridicule ;but I turn backto my own self (eir* efxauroi/ emoTpe<jx>)to see if I too err likethem . . . once I too was like them : but now no longer,thanks be to God !(354) (provocation) for with exceeding steadfastnesshe remembered that no man is master of another s soul (dX-Xorpiov yytfjiovLKov Kvpieuei) he is then careful not to will]except that which is really his (TO i Stov).While they for their part go on their own way and do thethings belonging to their character, he none the lessmaypreserve his own nature.(361) That alone is granted thee, to convince thyself(preaching) And that you may not think that I drawas detached and isolated anda picture of a pattern Cynic,aloof, having neither wife nor children nor fatherland, orfriends and kindred, by whom he might be bent and distracted from his single purpose, take Socrates and see himwith wife and children, yet not as truly his own (dXX*o>s(inquires) then shall he (so far as he may) preserveand continue the commonwealth of mankind ? Heaven bemerciful to your folly Do those who ! bring into the worldtwo or three brats with ugly noses to take their place,do these help mankind more than the missionaries who oversee all men according to their power, what they do, how they

298 MARCUS AURELIUSbespend their lives, what, contrary to their duty, theyneglect?"(animals) who use without reflection the impress of sensewhile we follow cautiously behind . . . wherefore for themit suffices to eat and the other details (of spontaneous life),but we cannot be content with this ;but we shall neverattain the end for which we were created, unless we act in setand orderly fashion and agreeably and suitably to the natureand constitution of each (aKoXovOw TTJ eKaorou K. Kara-<|>wio-Kvy). For those creatures whose constitutions are diverse,of these, too, the functions and the ends cannot be the same(&v yap at KaTcurKCuai Sict<opoiTOVTUV KOL TO.cpyo.K. TO.(operations) But man God brought into the world asspectator (Otarrjv), of Himself and of His works, and notmerely to be a silent witness, but also to extol and declareHis might (e^rjyrjrijv).(satisfaction) but rather begin where they leave off, andstop only at the highest point where Nature has ceased inour case. And this iscontemplation and attentive followingand living agreeably to Nature (KaTe\rjwCTTIOeupiav K.7rapaKoXov6r)<Tiv K. crv^^wvov Sieaya)yr)v rfj Qvcrti).Take carethen lest ye die without having obtained a glimpse of thesemarvels.(148) (spectators) Such then are human affairs as in somegreat concourse. Most men, some to buy, some to sell some;few there are who come for the sake of the sight offered themin the assemblage, how it takes place and wherefore, and whothey are who arrange it,and for what purpose.(world) Some as brute beasts think of nought but theirfood.(ambition) few there are who come a fairingin the truespirit (ot Travrjyvpi&vTts) men fond of the spectacles (<iAo-$ea/Aoveg) what this world is who ? guides its courses ? of whatnature is He and what His manner of 1governing and what

APPENDIX 299kind of creatures we are who have issued from Him as Hisoffering, and to what purpose framed (71-0105 TIS /c. TTWS SIOIKWV ;. . . rwSoi/res K. ?rpos TI iipyov ;).(Zpyov) whether we have some attachment and kindredrelationship with Him or none at all ? (eVtTrXoK^v . . . cr^W).For the rest, their leisure is in this alone absorbed, how toclosely survey the fair and inquire and then quietly departand for their pains they are derided by the rabble.CHAPTER III(104) Death, what is it 1 an ugly mask to frighten children ;turn it round and see what it really is ; see, it cannot bite ! This poor body must be severed from the littlebreath, as it was before, now or some time later on. Why beindignant if it be to-day ? . . . that the world s great periodmay be consummated (-n-epioSos dw^rai) ;for it has need ofsome to be now, others to wait for birth, and others alreadyspent and done (^vuoyieVwv).(179) What then? does this teaching not please you ? Seenow, how righteousness is nothing, reverence is but folly;father, son but empty, meaningless names.the barest(comical) But when God bestows not on youneedful for life, as a general He sounds the recall to Hissoldiers ;He sets the door open and says to you, Comehence !(death ?)Whither ? not to aught that is terrible, but to theplace whence you came, to things friendly and kindred (cts ra(us ?).As much of fire as was in you will depart to jointhe central flame, of common clay to earth again, etc. Thereisno Hell nor Acheron nor Cocytus nor Pyriphlegethon, butall things are fulfilled (as Thales said)of "gods and daemons."(me 1) fool, you he cannot slay, only your poor corpse !

(a<j5>es XvOyvai""now300 MARCUS AURELIUS(266) This poor body of mine is nothing to me ; its partsare nothing to me. Death ? let it come when it will, eitherof whole or of a limb. Exile 1 and who can banish me fromGod s universe 1 Wheresoever I go there will His sun shine,there moon and stars ;there too holy dreams and auguriesand sweet converse with the heavenly ones.(301) As is winter to fig, such is every circumstance fromthe universal order to the things consumed and destroyed init. ... It signifies the death of the ears of corn, not of theworld. For all such is but passing of things that were intoother forms of things to be ;not death at all, but a settledand orderly management as of thrifty house-steward.(OUK dirwXcia aAAa reray/xeVr; TIS oUoyojua K. SIOI K^O-IS) . . .Death, a change a shifting more intense than any ofthese, from what now is to I will not say that which is"shallnot, but into that which is not yet (cts TO vvv py 6V),I then cease to be 1 asks the anxious inquirer. Yes (OUKort),but in your place will arise something of whichGod s order has need. For you, too, came into being not ata moment when you desired, but when the world wantedyou.(Domitian) Put on no tragic airs about a matter so simple :say what is really the case,is it the due season for meto restore the material to the constituents again who providedit. What is there terrible in that 1 what part of the world isgoing toperish 1 "(so Epictetus is consoled in death by reflecting on the indestructibility of matter, and the thoughtthat it will all go on just as well without him).(34) We are in some sense kindred of the gods above,and from thence have we come here. Set us free toreturn thither again ;let us sometime at least be set clearof these manacles that weigh us down, so closely are theyattached TTOTC TWV !oW/Awy TOVTWV).Men ! waitWhen He gives the word offor God in patient expectancy!command and releases you from this service, then shall ye go,

eturn again to Him !APPENDIX 301(dire\cu<ro-0 ?rpos auroV). But for thepresent time bear with your lot, dwelling in this spot to whichas a sentinel He has assigned you.to Him who(47) O e S) "Will you not cheerfully resign it againgave it 1 Will you be sullen and indifferent to the orders ofZeus, which He with the Fates present and weaving your lineof life into the universal texture, solemnly notified and foreordained ? Know you not yet how tiny a fraction of thewhole !(fjXiKovt/jipo<s Trpos TO, But this "OAa). (he adds orcorrects) only on the side of body, for in reason are you nowhit inferior or less noble than the gods themselves. For thegrandeur of Keason is not measured by breadth or height, butby firm convictions (Xoyov /xeye#os . . . Soy/mcru ).(46) He ordained summer and winter, plenty and scarcity,virtue and evil, and all such like pairs of opposite (eVai/rto-TT/ras) to ensure the tuneful harmony of the Whole.(l8) If, then, it was my lot to be deceived, and to learnfalsely that of things without, which our will controls not,nothing concerns us at all, I would leave rather this deceit,from which I should live with calm and even flow of life andturmoil ;but do you see for yourselves what you wouldprefer.(8p) In what then lies the distinctive endowment of man ?See if it be not in this power of following attentively whathe does, by the generous instinct, by trustiness, by reverence,by sureness, by prudence 1evil for man to(end) Where then is great good or greatbe found? Just in his special and distinguishing quality(OTTOU 17 8ia<j>opd).(134) The beginning of the study of Wisdom with thosewho approach their mistress as they ought, is a bitter selfconsciousnessof frailtyand helplessness about things mostneedful.(285) For the lecture-room of a sage is the consulting-roomof a physician ; you should not leave the presence with

302 MARCUS AURELIUSpleasurable, but with painful feelings(loneliness) Ah !wretched that I am ! Herahave I lostand Athene ! no son or kinsman have I any longer !(eu/ai)None the less is it right to make preparationbeforehand against this peril, to be able to be content withoneself alone (aurov eaurw apKeiy),to live in converse withoneself; just as Zeus communes with his soul in solitarymajesty, and is at rest and peace with himself, and bethinkshim of his rule and governance what sort it is, and is in deepthoughts fitting his nature.(251) For ye see that our emperor gives us, as it wouldappear, peace lasting and secure, because there are no morewars or battles, no great robber-bands or pirates to infest thesea; but a man may in any season travel on his way unharmed, and sail from east to west.(319) One who is a slave straightway prays to heaven thathe may be released a freeman. I be "If enfranchised," hesays,"at once there shall be a great calm.I care for nobody,to all I speak on equal terms. I go wheresoever my fancyleads, I come back at will."(Russia) Then he has been set free : and forthwith, nothaving wherewithal to sustain life, he seeks one whom hemay flatter and fawn upon, and suffers miseries worse thandeath itself : he has fallen into the trap, a fresh slavery farmore grievous than the earlier (e/xTreTrrcoKei/ cts SoiAeiW TTO\VTJJS Trpore/oasPrinted by MORRISON & GIBB LIMITED, Edinburgh

In neat Crown 8vo Volumes, THREE SHILLINGS each.THEWORLD SEPOCH = MAKERS.EDITED BYOLIPHANT SMEATON, M.A.An excellent Series of Biographical Studies. ATHEX-EUM.We advise our readers to keep a watch on this most able series.It promises to be a distinct success. The volumes before us are themost satisfactory boohs of the sort we have ever read.METHODIST TIMES.CRANMER AND THE ENGLISHREFORMATION.BY A. D. INNES, M.A.To turn from the reading of the ordinary manuals which are flooding the marketjust now disguised under an ingenious variety of captivating titles, but obviouslyintended for the use of boys and girls engaged in "getting up their period "and to findoneself in the hands of the earnest and accomplished author of this notable monograph,is to feel lifted into a higher plane of thought and feeling. Athenceum.If we praised this book as highly as we "thought, we should be deemed high-falutin.". . . How the author has managed to put so much in so short a space and yet neverto be dull or jejune we cannot understand. . . . The whole is a model of what such abook should be. If any one thinks this praise too high, we advise them to read it ;like ourselves, they will be surprised. Cambridge Review.WESLEY AND METHODISM.BY F. J. 8NELL, M.A.The book deserves praise for the knowledge it shows of Wesley s character andwritings, and also for its style, which is thoughtful and interesting. Literature.A well-studied account of the system of belief and practice which grew up aroundthe figure of John Wesley.. . . The work reckons up not only Wesley s contributionto clerical affairs, but his influence in the social life of his own and later times. ... Itis a thoughtful and valuable monograph, which should be read with sympathy andprofit by every one interested in its subject. Scotsman.LUTHER AND THE GERMANREFORMATION.BY PRINCIPAL T. M. LINDSAY, D.D.Especially is there room for so able and judicious a work as this. The story ofLuther s life is told simply and well, and it is, above all, related to the time and itsstrange new forces and problems. ... We think that students of the life of Luthercould hardly find a better work than this. ... In every way an admirable work.Spectator.The matter is well arranged, and the narrative is admirably told, the author s stylebeing fresh, clear, and vigorous. Record.

""The World s Epoch- Makers.BUDDHA AND BUDDHISM.BY ARTHUR LILLIE.1Mr. Lillie has succeeded in clearly and lucidly mapping out the main broad factsof this fascinating religion. Oxford Review.His book is a solid performance, showing much industry and scholarship, and hispresentation of Buddha and his message of peace, charity, and universal benevolenceis both discriminating and sympathetic, and deserves hearty welcome. Indian Review.WILLIAM HERSCHEL AND HISWORK.BY JAMES SIME, M.A., F.R.S.E.This book is one of an excellent series of biographical studies. . . .Probably manywill share our first impression that another life of William Herschel was scarcelyneeded ;but any such impression is likely to be removed by a perusal of the workbefore us. . . . All students of astronomy must feel an abiding interest in his careerand most of them will find much fresh information respecting it in the work before us,in which the story of his life is told with great freshness and vigour. Athenwum.Nothing remains but to praise this full and accurate account of his lifeand work.We have no work in the country which supplies what this volume gives in full.Critical Review.FRANCIS AND DOMINICAND THE MENDICANT ORDERS.BY PROFESSOR JOHN HERKLESS, D.D.A scholarly and trustworthy sketch of the rise and progress of the Spanish andItalian Orders. . . . This volume is a worthy companion to Principal Lindsay s onLuther and this is surely the highest praise we can giveit,. Sword and Trowel.;Dr. Herkless gives a vivid picture of the progress of the two Orders, Franciscansand Dominicans, and also an even more striking account of their degradation. SaintAndrew.SAVONAROLA.BY REV. G. M HARDY, D.D.A clear and plain account of the great Italian Reformer, written in a spirit ofdiscriminating appreciation. Christian World.Dr. M Hardyis ly fair, judicial, and yet considerate; his pages reveal the student,and he directs the reader to sources which will enable every one to frame a verdict onthe sentence. ... In this excellent work the substance, drift, and final meaning ofthis heroic yet visionary life are given. Bookman.ANSELM AND HIS WORK.BY REV. A. C. WELCH, B.D.

The World sEpoch-Makers.MUHAMMAD AND HISBY P.POWER.DE LACY JOHN3TONE, M.A.Every page of his brilliant, confident narrative reveals the man who knows. 1Expository Times.Gives in a moderate compass a thoroughly good popular account of Muhammad scareer and influence. Guardian.AND GREEK PATRISTICTHEOLOGY.BY REV. W. FAIRWEATHER, M.A.ORIQENA very interesting and scholarly monograph. The treatment is singularly complete. ... Of real value. It is lucid in style, clear in its arrangement, and, whilewritten by a sympathetic hand, gives an impression of perfect fairness of mind andtrained historical sense. Guardian.THE MEDICI AND THE ITALIANBYRENAISSANCE.OLIPHANT SMEATON, M.A.1Their history is delightfully set forth in Mr. Smeaton s charming pages, which giveevidence of wide and careful reading, masterly historical analysis, discriminating judgment, and sympathetic handling. Aberdeen Journal.PLATO.BY PROF. D. G. RITCHIE, M.A., LL.D.Prof. Ritchie offers an admirable epitome of the phases of Plato s doctrine as itgradually developed and the relation of Plato to his . . . contemporaries is set forthvery persuasively. Pilot.PASCAL AND THE PORT ROYALISTS.BY PROF. W. CLARK, D.D., LL.D., TORONTO.This is the best book we know for anyone who wishes to study a great man and anhistoric controversy. London Quarterly Review.EUCLID: His Life and System.BY THOMAS SMITH, D.D.,LL.D.A book of fascinating interest to many who would never dream of calling themselvesmathematicians. Westminster Review.HEGEL ANDBY PROF. R.HEGELIANISM.MACKINTOSH, D.D.,Lancashire Independent College, Manchester.As an introduction to Hegel, no more trustworthy guide can be desired than thatwhich is here presented and one cannot rise from a; perusal of this short volumewithout being conscious of mental stimulus and enrichment. Saint Andrew.20

The World sEpoch- Makers.DAVIDHUMEAnd his Influence on Philosophy and Theology.BY PROF. J. ORR, M.A., D.D., GLASGOW.cA marvel of condensation, of clear statement, and of brilliant criticism. . . .Prof. Orr s volume will in all probability prove a student s book its wealth of;quotation, its clear, succinct statement, its masterly criticism, give it a great educativevalue. Altogether it is an admirable piece of work. Aberdeen Journal.ROUSSEAU AND NATURALISM INLIFE AND THOUGHT.BY PROF. W. H.HUDSON, M.A.Prof. Hudson has skilfully done the difficult work of writing a short accountf Rousseau. His book is well proportioned, clear, and eminently readable. He doesfull justice to the literary power of his subject, and he expounds his chief doctrinespolitical, educational, and religious with admirable clearness and conciseness.Manchester Guardian.DESCARTES, SPINOZA, AND THENEW PHILOSOPHY.BY PRINCIPAL IVERACH, D.D.,ABERDEEN.As a short study of the philosophies of Descartes and Spinoza the book is excellent.The author brings out clearly the fundamental conceptions of each. Dundee Advertiser.SOCRATES.BY REV. J. T. FORBES, M.A., GLASGOW.WYCLIFFE AND THE LOLLARDS.BY REV. J. C. CARRICK, B.D.CARDINAL NEWMANAnd his Influence on Religious Life and Thought.BY C. SAROLEA, Ph.D., LiTT.Doc., EDINBURGH.MARCUS AURELIUS AND THE LATER STOICSBY F. W. BUSSELL, D.D., VICE-PRINCIPAL OFBRASENOSE COLLEGE, OXFORD.The following Volumes have also been arranged for :Augustine and Latin Patristic Lessing and the New Humanism.Theology. By Professor B. B. By Rev. A. P. DAVIDSON, M.A.WARFIELD, D.D., Princeton.Bacons and Experi-^2SV K; *= - CT*M.A.,,D.Sc., University of Aberdeen.Schleiermacher and the Rejuvenescence of Theology. ByProfessor A. MAETIN, D.D., NewKant and his Philosophical Revolution. By Professor R. M.WENLEY, D.Sc., Ph.D., UniverCollege, Edinburgh.sity of Michigan.Published Price, THREE SHILLINGS per Volume.

A work that will be of constant use to ministers and Bible students.British Weekly.Complete in TWO VOLUMES.A DICTIONARY OFCHRIST AND THE GOSPELS.EDITED BY JAMES HASTINGS, D.D.The purpose of this Dictionary is to give an account of everything thatrelates to CHRIST His Person, Life, Work, and Teaching.It is first of all a preacher s Dictionary. Its authors are preachers aswell as scholars.The articles are all new. Even when their titles are the same as thetitles of articles in the Dictionary of the Bible, they are written by newmen, and with a now purpose.The articles are not entirely limited to the Bible, but gather togetherwhatever touches Christ in all the history and experience of the Church.It is called A DICTIONARY OF CHRIST AND THE GOSPELS, because itincludes everything that the Gospels contain, whether directly relatedto CHRIST or not. Its range, however, is far greater than that of theGospels. It seeks to cover all that relates to Christ throughout theBible and in the life and literature of the world. Much attention hasbeen given to modern thought, whether Christian or anti-Christian.Every aspect of modern life, in so far as it touches or is touched byChrist, is described under its proper title.It will be found that the contents of the Gospels, especially theirspiritual contents, have never before been so thoroughly investigatedand set forth.Price per Volume, in cloth .... 21s. netor in half-morocco, gilt top.. . . 26s. net,The preacher s purpose is better served than it has ever been before.Times.A scholarly production, edited with admirable skill. Christian World.(Valuable for all scholars and students, it should prove invaluable for thepreacher.Methodist Times.1We know of no book likely to be more helpful to the parochial clergy.Guardian.Invaluable to preachers and teachers, and ought to be in constant use.Churchman.Full Prospectus,with Specimen Pages, free on application.EDINBURGH : T. & T. CLARK,38 GEORGE STREET.

WORKS BY REV. W. L. WALKER.Third Edition, Revised. 8vo, 9s.THE SPIRIT AND THEINCARNATION,In the Light of Scripture, Science, and Practical Need.In a leading article, headedPrincipal MARCUS DODS wrote :A GREAT BOOK, in the British Weekly,It may be questioned whether in recent yearsthere has appeared, at home or abroad, any theological work more deservingof careful study. He who intelligently reads it once will inevitably read itagain and again.8vo, 9s.THE CROSS AND THE KINGDOM,As Viewed by Christ Himself and in the Light of Evolution.1We desire to speak with admiration of the good work done in this book.It is worthy to stand beside his former treatise. Taking both together, theyform a magnificent contribution to the theological literature of the age.Principal IVBRACH in the Expository Times.Second Edition. 8vo, 9s.CHRISTIAN THEISMAND A SPIRITUAL MONISM.God, Freedom, and Immortality, in View of Monistic Evolution.A very valuable book, full of wide knowledge and clear thinking. Weheartily commend this work. Methodist Times.la Post 8vo, 5s.THE GOSPEL OF RECONCILIATION;Or,AT-ONE-MENT.Mr. Walker s name on the title-page of a book is sufficient gnarantee thatit will be worth studying. The present volume is marked both by solidscholarship and an alert appreciation of the spirit of the age, and is writtenwith all the author s usual lucidity and directness. Scotsman.New Edition, Revised and Reset. Crown 8 vo, 2s. 6d. net.THE TEACHING OF JESUSIn its Present Appeal.1Mr. Walker makes here a further valuable, if unpretentious, contributionto New Testament study. The work altogether should form an excellenthandbook on its subject for teachers and preachers. Christian World.EDINBURGH: T. & T. CLARK, 38 GEORGE STREET.

PLEASE DO NOT REMOVECARDS OR SLIPSFROM THIS POCKETUNIVERSITY OF TORONTO LIBRARYBBussell, Frederick WilliamMarcus Aurelius and the528B87 later Stoicscop. 2