In the last two decades Marcus Aurelius (a.d. 121–180) has functioned as a muse by inspiring numerous monographs, journal articles and even popular culture references. It was therefore timely that Oxford University Press published a revised translation of his Meditations. H. & G. originally published it in the ‘Wordsworth Classics’ series in 1997, but the revised edition is in the ‘Oxford World Classics’ series. While the Wordsworth edition was based on Farquharson's text (1944), the present translation benefited from the more recent and critical Teubner edition of Joachim Dalfen (2nd edn., 1987). The current edition excludes an essay published in 1863 by Matthew Arnold and an essay on Marcus Aurelius and Stoicism in exchange for the inclusion of selections from the correspondence of Marcus Aurelius and Fronto. This was a sagacious editorial decision because the letters nicely complement the Meditations.
Translation is a notoriously difficult undertaking because translators face the often painful choice of rigid adherence to the text and thus a literal translation or a more colloquially accessible edition at the expense of faithfulness to the text. H. suggests he sought not to ‘reproduce all the more awkward features of Marcus’ style, but to convey the content and flavour of his work in English that is (I hope) consistently lucid and accessible' (p. xxv). Marcus Aurelius' text poses difficulties because it is at times obscure, contextually difficult to understand and frequently staccato in its construction. At other points, it is flowing and elegant. It sometimes reads in Greek as if it were dictated rather than composed by Marcus Aurelius' hand. This has been discussed elsewhere and would pose a minor consideration were it not for the questions of interpretation that accompany translation. H. has translated several ancient authors, and this volume suggests a steady phronesis earned through experience.
H.'s aim at accessibility largely succeeds with some exceptions. For example, at 5.28 Marcus Aurelius probes the proper response to a man whose bodily stench offends olfactory senses. Anger clearly will not do, leaving Marcus Aurelius to employ his reason and persuasive powers. The translation, ‘Gracious me, you have reason too, so set his powers of reason to work by making use of your own’, is overly colloquial if not precious. The Greek reads Εὔ σοι γένοιτο, suggesting something akin to ‘may it go/be well for you’ in reference to his own plan of persuading the man. ‘Gracious me’ remains absent in the Greek text, but the passage has been variously rendered in English, French and German translations. The reader wishes for a more literal adherence to the text in instances like these.
G.'s seventeen-page introduction is a reworking of the twelve-page Wordsworth edition's front matter. G. provides an updated bibliography. This serves as a reminder about the sheer quantity of recent publications on Marcus Aurelius. G. also furnishes revised notes, with a focus on understanding the intellectual context in general and continued scrutiny of Stoicism in particular. Considering Marcus Aurelius' references to governing throughout the text, additional commentary about vicissitudes during his reign would have been helpful, especially for introductory-level students. Another area that might have benefited from further explanation relates to what Marcus Aurelius was doing in taking such notes. Although it might be conceded that the Meditations belonged to no particular literary genre (p. viii), they were not without similarity either in philosophical or literary domains. Part of Stoic and philosophical praxis involved suspension of judgement until further reflection helped distinguish between impressions. Meditating in writing or even conversation functioned as one of the ways to engage in such ruminations.
Selections from 31 letters out of the larger corpus of correspondence between Marcus Aurelius and Fronto follow the text. The rationale for their presence includes inter alia their preservation of a different side of Marcus Aurelius. The translator and editor asseverate, ‘the letters offer us another voice and thus another point of access to this thoughtful and principled person’ (p. 125). Indeed, one wonders why a larger portion of the correspondence could not have been included. The letters, translated from Latin, flow well. The van den Hout (1988 Teubner edn) text provided the Latin, but the Loeb edition of Haines (1919–20) loomed in the background. A frustration with this correspondence derives from the lack of consistent citation format for Fronto's work as a whole. The editors bear no responsibility for this; remedying the situation remained beyond the scope of this book, but headings fortunately provide the pagination from both the Teubner and Loeb editions. The renewed interest in the letters signifies that contemporary scholars do not find them as frivolous or as disappointing as prior generations.
Several translations of the Meditations now circulate, but the changes found in this edition suggest that revisions will continue to improve the choice of texts available to students and scholars alike. One suspects that as the quality increases new translations will continue to emerge.
