Marcus Aurelius: Key Ideas, Methods and How to Apply Them
A factual guide to Marcus Aurelius, the Roman emperor who kept the private notebooks published as Meditations: his life and sources, a plain Meditations summary, a week of practices drawn from the text, the criticism of his reign and his philosophy, and how he differs from Epictetus and Seneca.
Who was Marcus Aurelius and what did the stoic emperor actually teach?
Marcus Aurelius was Roman emperor from 161 to 180 CE and the author of the private notebooks published today as Meditations. He was born in Rome on 26 April 121 into a wealthy senatorial family with roots in the Spanish province of Baetica, and was originally named Marcus Annius Verus. The emperor Hadrian built the succession that delivered him power: in 138 Hadrian adopted Antoninus Pius on the condition that Pius adopt Marcus and Lucius Verus in turn. Marcus Aurelius took the throne in 161 and immediately made Verus his equal in rank, the first joint emperorship in Roman history. What the stoic emperor taught, in his own framing, is narrow. Your judgments and your character are the only things fully yours. Events carry no verdict of their own; the distress arrives with the verdict you attach. You belong to something larger and owe other people cooperation rather than resentment, including the ones obstructing you. Death is coming, is ordinary, and is not an argument against acting well now. None of this was taught publicly. There is no record of Marcus Aurelius lecturing or publishing, and the notebooks are addressed to a single reader, himself.
Marcus Aurelius is unusual among philosophical figures because the life can be checked against the writing. Cassius Dio and Herodian wrote narrative histories covering his reign, the Historia Augusta adds a late and often invented layer, and his letters to his teacher Fronto survive independently. Set against that record, the notebooks stop looking like the reflections of a man with time on his hands. His reign opened with a Parthian war, absorbed the epidemic now called the Antonine Plague that arrived with returning troops in the mid 160s, ran into more than a decade of fighting against the Marcomanni, Quadi and Sarmatians along the Danube, and included a revolt in 175 by his own senior general in the east, Avidius Cassius. He died in March 180 while still on the northern frontier. Books 2 and 3 of Meditations carry headings placing their composition on campaign. The book is field notes from a man losing patience, not a retirement project, and its repetitiveness is the strongest evidence of that.
Was Marcus Aurelius a philosopher or just a reader of philosophy?
Marcus Aurelius contributed no doctrine. He wrote no treatise on logic, physics or ethics, founded no school, and argued with no rival position. What he produced was applied philosophy: a record of one person using an inherited system on himself. Historians of philosophy usually treat him as a practitioner and a witness to late Stoicism rather than as an original thinker, and Meditations gives no grounds to argue otherwise.
What did Marcus Aurelius actually do as emperor?
Marcus Aurelius spent most of his reign at war on the Danube frontier, shared power first with Lucius Verus until Verus died in 169 and later with his son Commodus from 177, heard legal cases, managed the finances of an empire hit by plague and prolonged campaigning, and put down the revolt of Avidius Cassius in 175. He was an administrator and a wartime commander who wrote at night.
What is Meditations by Marcus Aurelius and how was it written?
Meditations is a collection of personal notes in twelve short books, written in Greek by Marcus Aurelius, most likely during the 170s while he was on campaign. He gave it no title. The traditional Greek heading translates as To Himself, and the familiar English name is a later editorial choice. Two of the books carry location notes: Book 2 is marked as written among the Quadi at the river Granua, Book 3 at Carnuntum on the Danube. There is no argument running from start to finish. Entries range from a single line to a page, subjects recur without development, and the same points are made again in slightly different words, which is what rehearsal looks like on paper. Book 1 is the exception and the most human part of the book: a list of named people, from his grandfather and his mother to his teachers and his adoptive father Antoninus Pius, each credited with a specific quality he says he learned from them. Read as a whole, meditations marcus aurelius left behind is less a work of instruction than a maintenance log for a mind under strain.
The survival of the text was close to accidental. Marcus Aurelius did not circulate it, and there is no confident evidence that anyone read it in his lifetime. References to it are scarce for centuries, and the manuscript tradition that reaches us is thin: one important Greek manuscript held in the Vatican, plus a second manuscript, now lost, that supplied the first printed edition produced by Wilhelm Xylander in 1559. Almost everything about the book's early history rests on that narrow base, which is why scholars are cautious about dating individual entries or reconstructing the order Marcus Aurelius wrote them in. The practical consequence for a reader is that the book has no authoritative structure to respect. You can open it anywhere. Editors who impose thematic groupings are making the text easier to use, not restoring an original design that was lost.
Did Marcus Aurelius write Meditations for publication?
Nothing in Meditations suggests Marcus Aurelius wrote it for readers. There is no dedication, no address to an audience, no explanation of Stoic terms he already knew, and no attempt to smooth out repetition. He argues with himself, scolds himself and repeats the same consolations, which is behavior that makes sense only in private. The book became public because it survived, not because he released it.
What order should you read Meditations in?
Start with Book 1 for the portrait of the people who shaped Marcus Aurelius, then read Books 2, 4 and 5, which contain the highest concentration of the arguments the rest of the book repeats. After that, order does not matter much. Because the entries are self-contained, most readers do better with a few pages a day than with a continuous read.
Where did Marcus Aurelius get his Stoicism from?
Marcus Aurelius inherited his Stoicism from Epictetus, and he says so. In Book 1 he credits Junius Rusticus with correcting his taste for rhetorical display and with giving him access to the discourses of Epictetus, a former slave who taught in Nicopolis and whose lectures were written down by his student Arrian. The debt shows on nearly every page: the division between what is up to us and what is not, the focus on assent and judgment, and the refusal to blame circumstances all come from Epictetus. Other named influences in Book 1 include the Stoic teachers Apollonius of Chalcedon, Claudius Maximus and Sextus of Chaeronea, and Diognetus, who he says taught him skepticism about miracle-mongering. Marcus Cornelius Fronto taught him Latin rhetoric and remained a correspondent. Behind all of them sits the school founded by Zeno of Citium in Athens around 300 BCE and systematized by Chrysippus, whose technical works survive only in fragments. Marcus Aurelius adds no doctrine to that inheritance. He compresses it and applies it.
The Fronto letters complicate the tidy story of a young man converted to philosophy. They show Marcus Aurelius as a student devoted to rhetoric, and they show Fronto pushing back against philosophy as a rival claim on his attention. Whatever happened between the two interests, the notebooks record the result: Marcus Aurelius repeatedly attacks ornamental language and self-display, which reads like a man arguing with his own training. There is also a gap worth noticing between what Roman Stoicism had been and what he did with it. The early school built a full system covering logic, physics and ethics, with technical arguments about causation and fate. By the time it reaches Marcus Aurelius the logic has fallen away almost entirely and the physics survives as a set of consoling images about change, decomposition and the whole. He is working with the ethical residue of a larger structure, and he knows it.
What is the connection between Marcus Aurelius and Epictetus?
Marcus Aurelius never met Epictetus, who died before he came of age, and knew him through written discourses supplied by Junius Rusticus. He quotes and paraphrases Epictetus by name in Meditations. The relationship is one-directional: Epictetus is the source, Marcus Aurelius the reader applying the material to a life Epictetus never lived, at the top of the political system rather than outside it.
Did Marcus Aurelius invent Stoicism?
No. Stoicism was roughly 400 years old when Marcus Aurelius was born. Zeno of Citium founded the school in Athens around 300 BCE, Chrysippus gave it its technical form, and Roman writers including Seneca, Musonius Rufus and Epictetus reshaped it toward practical ethics. Marcus Aurelius is the last major surviving voice in that line, not its origin.
What is a Meditations summary in plain terms?
A useful meditations summary is that the book returns to about six claims and applies them to whatever is annoying Marcus Aurelius that day. First, disturbance comes from your judgment about an event, not the event, so the judgment is where the work happens. Second, only your own choices are fully in your power; bodies, reputations, other people and outcomes are not. Third, everything is in the process of changing into something else, including you, and treating that as an outrage is a category error. Fourth, human beings are made for cooperation, so treating other people's failures as personal attacks misreads the situation. Fifth, obstruction can be used as material, since being blocked in one direction still leaves the question of how you behave while blocked. Sixth, only the present is ever at stake, because the past is gone and the future is not yours to lose. The tone matters as much as the content. Marcus Aurelius is not describing a state he has reached. He is issuing corrections to himself, in the imperative, over and over.
Pierre Hadot, in The Inner Citadel, argued that these scattered entries are more organized than they look, and that Meditations is best read as constant exercise in three linked disciplines drawn from Epictetus: the discipline of assent, which governs what you agree is true about an event; the discipline of desire, which governs what you want from a world you do not control; and the discipline of action, which governs how you treat other people. Hadot's reading is influential and worth knowing, though it is an interpretation imposed on an unsystematic text rather than a structure Marcus Aurelius announces. Read the book with those three headings in mind and most entries slot into one of them. Read it without them and it still works, just more slowly, since the repetition eventually teaches you the pattern on its own.
What does Marcus Aurelius mean by the inner citadel?
The inner citadel is Pierre Hadot's name, drawn from an image in Book 8, for the part of a person that cannot be reached from outside: the faculty that forms judgments. Marcus Aurelius argues that an insult, an illness or a defeat can reach your circumstances and your body but has no access to your assessment of them unless you grant it. The citadel is only lost from within.
What does Marcus Aurelius say about death?
Marcus Aurelius treats death as a natural process rather than a threat, and returns to it constantly. His arguments are that death happens to everyone including the famous and the powerful, that a longer life adds more of the same rather than something new, and that the only thing anyone loses at death is the present moment. He uses it as a spur to act well immediately, not as consolation.
What does Marcus Aurelius say about fame and reputation?
Marcus Aurelius attacks the desire for reputation harder than almost any other subject, which is notable given his position. His arguments are that the people whose praise you want are themselves unreliable judges, that posthumous fame is enjoyed by people who cannot enjoy it, and that even the most celebrated names of previous generations are already forgotten. The conclusion he draws is to work for the result rather than the credit.
How did Marcus Aurelius handle difficult people and anger?
Marcus Aurelius attacked anger by preparation and by reframing motive, and the technique is one of the most concrete things in the book. Book 2 opens with an instruction to himself for first thing in the morning: expect to meet people who are interfering, ungrateful, arrogant and dishonest, so that their behavior arrives as forecast rather than as an insult. He then adds the reason it should not provoke him, which is that they act that way through ignorance about what is genuinely good, that they are related to him in the sense of sharing the same rational nature, and that they cannot damage his own conduct unless he lets them. Book 11 contains a longer set of reminders for use when someone has wronged you, including the observations that you do the same things for different reasons, that you rarely know their circumstances, and that anger and grief at other people's faults harm you more reliably than the faults do. Elsewhere Marcus Aurelius argues that the strongest response to being wronged is refusing to become like the person who wronged you.
This is where the gap between Stoic theory and popular Stoicism is widest. The advice is not to feel nothing. Marcus Aurelius is explicit that the target is the judgment underneath the reaction, which is why the entries argue rather than command: he tries to talk himself out of a verdict, on the grounds that the verdict, not the person, produces the anger. The method has an obvious weakness, which he does not address. Assuming that people wrong you out of ignorance is generous, and generosity is often right, but some people are acting deliberately and against your interests, and reclassifying them as confused can leave you slow to respond. Marcus Aurelius had legions and could afford the assumption. A reader who does not should keep the calm and drop the charity when evidence points the other way.
Does Stoicism as Marcus Aurelius practiced it mean suppressing emotion?
No. The Stoic claim, and the one Marcus Aurelius works with, is that strong disturbing emotions follow from judgments about what is good and bad, so the intervention is at the level of the judgment rather than the expression. Suppression leaves the judgment intact and hides the result. Marcus Aurelius is also visibly irritated in places, which suggests the practice was corrective rather than complete.
What did Marcus Aurelius do about the revolt of Avidius Cassius?
In 175 Avidius Cassius, the senior commander in the eastern provinces, was declared emperor after a report that Marcus Aurelius had died. Marcus Aurelius prepared to march east, and the revolt collapsed when Cassius was killed by his own officers within months. Ancient sources report that Marcus Aurelius sought leniency for those involved, which fits his writing, though the reports come from admiring historians.
Which Marcus Aurelius quotes are real, and which translation should you read?
Many circulating marcus aurelius quotes are unreliable, and the reason is structural rather than sinister. Meditations was written in Greek and has been translated repeatedly over four centuries, so a single passage exists in a dozen legitimate English wordings, from George Long's Victorian rendering to Gregory Hays's fluent 2002 version for Modern Library. Social media then compresses those into something punchier than any translator wrote. The best-known example is the passage in Book 5 that Hays renders as "The impediment to action advances action. What stands in the way becomes the way." Other translators produce noticeably flatter English for the same Greek. The practical test is citation: genuine material from Marcus Aurelius can be traced to a book and section number, such as 2.1 or 6.6, and quotations circulating without one deserve suspicion. Several popular lines attributed to Marcus Aurelius, including the widely shared claim that you have power over your mind but not over outside events, match no standard translation and are best treated as modern paraphrase of recurring themes rather than as his words.
Translation choice changes the reading experience more than most readers expect. Gregory Hays produces short, blunt modern sentences and is the version most new readers finish; purists object that he cuts and smooths. Martin Hammond for Penguin and Robin Hard for Oxford World's Classics stay closer to the Greek while remaining readable, and both come with substantial introductions and notes, which matter for a text this compressed. C. R. Haines in the Loeb Classical Library prints the Greek alongside the English and is the version to reach for when you want to check what a famous line actually says. George Long's nineteenth-century translation is free of copyright and therefore everywhere online, which is why so much circulating material sounds archaic. If you only read one, read Hays and keep Hard or Haines nearby for verification.
Which translation of Meditations should a first-time reader choose?
For a first read, the Gregory Hays translation published by Modern Library in 2002 is the most approachable, because the sentences are short and the archaism is gone. Readers who want closer fidelity and fuller notes are better served by Robin Hard's Oxford World's Classics edition or Martin Hammond's Penguin edition. Free online versions are usually George Long's, which is accurate enough but dated in tone.
How can you check whether a Marcus Aurelius quote is genuine?
Find the book and section number, then look it up in at least two translations. Meditations is short and fully indexed, so any genuine passage can be located. If a quotation has no citation, appears only on quote sites, or sounds like modern self-help phrasing, treat it as unverified. A surprising share of material attributed to Marcus Aurelius online fails this test.
What Marcus Aurelius practice can you try this week?
Run one exercise a day for seven days, each taken from a specific part of Meditations, and keep the total under ten minutes. Monday, the morning forecast from Book 2: before you open anything, name the two people or situations most likely to obstruct you today and decide now how you will respond. Tuesday, the control audit: take one live problem, split a page into what is up to you and what is not, and act only on the left column. Wednesday, plain description: write the thing bothering you with every loaded word removed, so that a betrayal becomes a message sent at a particular time containing particular sentences. Thursday, the view from above: spend three minutes picturing your situation from high enough that you are one person among millions doing similar things. Friday, the obstacle question from Book 5: name what is blocking you and write what it now makes possible or necessary. Saturday, the debt list from Book 1: write one person, one quality they gave you, one sentence. Sunday, review which of the six did anything, and keep those.
The point of the week is not calm, and treating calm as the success criterion is the fastest way to abandon the practice. Marcus Aurelius wrote the same reminders to himself for years, which tells you the effect wears off and needs reapplying. Judge the week by conduct instead: did you send the measured reply rather than the satisfying one, did you start the difficult task on the day you planned, did you drop a grievance you had been maintaining. Two practical warnings. The morning forecast becomes cynicism if you use it to rehearse contempt for colleagues rather than to prepare responses, so keep the emphasis on what you will do. And the control audit fails when people use it to reclassify things they could influence as things outside their power, which turns a discipline into an excuse. If the left column is always empty, the audit is being done wrong.
What is the view from above exercise in Meditations?
The view from above is a recurring imaginative exercise in which Marcus Aurelius pictures human affairs from a great height or across long stretches of time, so that armies, arguments and reputations shrink to their actual scale. Modern readers use it as a three-minute practice before a stressful event. It reduces the felt size of a problem without changing the problem, which is the whole intent.
How long does the Marcus Aurelius morning practice take?
The morning forecast described in Book 2 of Meditations takes about two minutes. You name the likely friction of the day, remind yourself that other people's behavior is not a verdict on you, and decide your response in advance. The brevity is the reason it survives contact with a real schedule; longer routines are usually the first thing dropped in a bad week.
What is the strongest criticism of Marcus Aurelius and his Stoicism?
The strongest criticism of Marcus Aurelius is that a philosophy of accepting your role reads very differently when written by the man with the most power in the world. Concretely, Christians were executed during his reign, including Justin Martyr in Rome in the mid 160s and a group at Lugdunum, modern Lyon, in 177. Historians dispute how much Marcus Aurelius personally directed this, since prosecutions typically began with provincial governors, but the executions happened under his authority, and John Stuart Mill used him in On Liberty as the example of a genuinely good ruler who nonetheless persecuted a belief he misjudged. Marcus Aurelius also never questioned slavery or the structure of empire, and he spent much of his reign in wars of subjugation on the Danube frontier. Philosophically, critics argue that a system aimed at governing your reactions can substitute private composure for public justice, teaching people to adjust to conditions that should be changed. Nietzsche attacked the Stoic instruction to live according to nature as smuggling in a preferred picture of nature. And Marcus Aurelius left the empire to Commodus, whose reign was a disaster.
A separate line of criticism aims at how Meditations is used now rather than at Marcus Aurelius himself. The modern revival, driven by writers including Ryan Holiday and by cognitive-behavioral therapists such as Donald Robertson, tends to extract the psychological techniques and leave behind the physics and the theology that gave them their justification. Marcus Aurelius accepts what happens partly because he takes the universe to be rationally ordered; strip that out and acceptance loses its argument and becomes a mood. Critics of self-help Stoicism also note that it sells well to people who are already comfortable, and that the emphasis on personal composure suits employers. Defenders answer that the techniques work regardless of the metaphysics, and that Marcus Aurelius himself offers the gods-or-atoms fork as license to hold the cosmology loosely. Both positions are arguable. What is not arguable is that reading Meditations as a productivity manual leaves most of the book unread.
Did Marcus Aurelius persecute Christians?
Christians were executed during the reign of Marcus Aurelius, notably at Lyon in 177 and in Rome in the mid 160s. Whether he ordered a policy of persecution is disputed by historians, since enforcement usually originated with governors responding to local pressure. A passage in Book 11 of Meditations dismisses Christian defiance as mere obstinacy, though some scholars regard that line as a later insertion. The executions are documented; his personal intent is not settled.
Was leaving the empire to Commodus a failure of judgment?
It is the most common charge against Marcus Aurelius. He made his son Commodus co-ruler in 177, and Commodus went on to a reign that ancient sources treat as catastrophic. Defenders point out that earlier emperors adopted heirs largely because they lacked surviving sons, and that passing over a living son would have invited civil war. Critics reply that Marcus Aurelius had the authority to try.
Did Marcus Aurelius ever question slavery?
There is no passage in Meditations where Marcus Aurelius challenges slavery as an institution, and he ruled an economy built on it. Stoic writers held that a slave could be inwardly free and that all people share a rational nature, which sounds egalitarian, but the school treated legal status as an external matter outside the scope of virtue. That gap between Stoic universalism and Roman practice is a fair charge against Marcus Aurelius, not an anachronistic one.
How does Marcus Aurelius differ from Epictetus, Seneca and modern Stoic writers?
Marcus Aurelius differs from Epictetus and Seneca mainly in audience, and the difference is the reason readers pick one over the other. Epictetus was born into slavery, later taught his own school, and his surviving Discourses are lecture transcripts made by a student: the tone is that of a teacher pushing students, direct and often sarcastic, with the doctrine stated openly. Seneca was a rich Roman senator, a tragedian, and Nero's advisor, and his Letters to Lucilius are polished essays written with publication in mind, which is why they are the most quotable of the three and why the charge of hypocrisy has followed him since antiquity. Marcus Aurelius wrote for nobody. There is no rhetoric, no audience management and no attempt to be memorable, and the result is a book that reads like eavesdropping. Among modern writers, Donald Robertson approaches Marcus Aurelius through cognitive behavioral therapy in How to Think Like a Roman Emperor, while Ryan Holiday works the same material as popular self-improvement. Both are commentary on Marcus Aurelius rather than the primary text.
The choice between the three is practical. Read Epictetus when you want the argument stated clearly enough to test, because he explains what the position is and why it holds. Read Seneca when you want prose that will pull you along, and read him knowing that his own life sat awkwardly beside his advice. Read Marcus Aurelius when you want evidence that the method survives contact with power, illness, war and grief, since that is the situation the notebooks record. There is also a scholarly middle path worth knowing about: Pierre Hadot's The Inner Citadel and A. A. Long's work on Epictetus treat these texts as philosophy with a history rather than as a source of maxims. Readers who start with the modern popularizers and stop there usually end up with the vocabulary of Stoicism and none of the arguments underneath it.
Should you read Marcus Aurelius or Epictetus first?
Read Epictetus first if you want to understand the reasoning, since the Enchiridion states the position plainly in a few pages. Read Marcus Aurelius first if you want to see the ideas under load, because Meditations shows one person applying them repeatedly and imperfectly. Most people find Marcus Aurelius more moving and Epictetus more instructive, and the two take only a few hours combined.
Who should not read Meditations by Marcus Aurelius?
Meditations is a poor fit for anyone whose central problem is external and unjust rather than internal, because Marcus Aurelius offers almost nothing about changing conditions and a great deal about enduring them. It is also not treatment: someone in acute depression, fresh grief or crisis needs clinical care, not exhortation from a Roman emperor. Its emphasis on self-correction can reinforce self-blame in readers already prone to it.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is Meditations by Marcus Aurelius about?
Meditations is a set of private notes in which Marcus Aurelius argues himself into behaving well. The recurring subjects are narrow and repeat across all twelve books: that events are neutral until you judge them, that only your own character is fully yours, that other people's faults are not worth anger, that fame and the body decay, and that the present moment is the only thing anyone can actually lose. It contains no system, no proofs and no instructions for a reader, because Marcus Aurelius was not writing for one.
Was Marcus Aurelius a good emperor?
Ancient sources are unusually positive about Marcus Aurelius, and modern historians are more divided. He is credited with careful administration, expanded legal protections in some areas, and personal restraint during the Avidius Cassius revolt of 175. Against that sit the Danube wars, the treatment of Christians under his rule, an unchallenged slave economy, and the decision to leave power to his son Commodus. Cassius Dio and Herodian admired him; the Historia Augusta, a late and unreliable source, embroiders heavily.
How long does it take to read Meditations?
Meditations is short. Most modern translations run to roughly 100 to 150 pages, and a straight read takes a few hours. Reading it straight through is not how the book works, though. Because it repeats the same handful of arguments in different words, most readers get more out of a page or two at a time over weeks, marking the entries that land. The book was written in fragments over years and survives that treatment better than a novel would.
Did Marcus Aurelius write anything else?
No other work by Marcus Aurelius survives as a book. What does survive alongside Meditations is his correspondence with his rhetoric teacher Marcus Cornelius Fronto, recovered in the nineteenth century from a reused manuscript. Those letters show a different man from the one in the notebooks: affectionate, chatty, complaining about his health and his workload. Various imperial rulings and speeches are quoted in legal sources, but they are the output of a chancery, not authored philosophy.
Is Meditations a religious book?
Meditations is religious in a Stoic sense rather than a devotional one. Marcus Aurelius refers to the gods often, and to a rational ordering principle running through nature, and he treats gratitude and acceptance as owed to that order. He also repeatedly frames the question as a fork: either the universe is providentially ordered or it is atoms in motion, and he argues that his conduct should be the same either way. That move is why readers with no religious belief still find the book usable.
What is the dichotomy of control and did Marcus Aurelius invent it?
The dichotomy of control is the Stoic distinction between what is up to you, meaning your judgments, intentions and responses, and what is not, meaning your body, reputation, other people and outcomes. Marcus Aurelius did not invent it. It is the opening move of the Enchiridion of Epictetus, compiled by his student Arrian, and Marcus Aurelius credits Junius Rusticus with giving him access to Epictetus. What Marcus Aurelius adds is the sound of someone applying it under real pressure.
Why is Marcus Aurelius called the last of the Five Good Emperors?
The phrase Five Good Emperors comes from Machiavelli, who in his Discourses on Livy praised the run from Nerva through Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius as a period of unusually restrained rule. Marcus Aurelius is the last of that sequence because the pattern of adopting a capable successor stopped with him: he had a surviving son, Commodus, made him co-ruler in 177, and left him the empire. The label is a later historical judgment, not a Roman title.
Try Our Free Tools
Related topics: marcus aurelius, meditations marcus aurelius, marcus aurelius quotes, stoic emperor, meditations summary, marcus aurelius philosophy, marcus aurelius biography
