M. Aurelius went to the East to set all right again. He forbore to punish the rebellious provinces, although, the senate was very ready to do so. His mildness was even shown towards the son of Cassius, whom he wished to save, but who was murdered without his knowledge: the other children he actually saved; and he would not allow their estates to be confiscated. There are some remarkable letters of Cassius in which he expressed his discontent at the rule of Marcus, whom he calls _dialogista_. We cannot wonder at this: it is quite possible, that a practical man of sterling ability, like Cassius, should have found that Marcus, notwithstanding his private virtues, was not fit for his dignity; for although the latter most conscientiously devoted himself to public business, he had no heart for ruling, and was always much more inclined towards other pursuits. There is another passage in his letters worthy of attention, in which it is said, that Marcus was a noble-hearted man, but that he was not able to judge of those about him; so that any one who gave himself out to be a philosopher, would get hold of him, and try under this disguise to serve his own ends. Just so was Julian likewise taken in by any one who called himself a philosopher; and so has been many a prince in our own times by the Tartuffes. Some additional light is now thrown on the state of things under M. Aurelius by the fragments of Fronto. These letters, however trifling their literary value may be, are of very high historical importance. The weakness of Marcus for many people, and above all for Faustina, shows that he carried several of his virtues even to excess, more especially his virtues as a husband and a father. Fronto lets himself be used as a tool by Faustina to set aside the will of an old aunt, the younger Matidia, because she had not left in it anything to the empress. Marcus answers him in a remarkable note, in which he thanks him. We do not know how the matter ended; but there can be no doubt that he really set aside the will. This weakness must also have been displayed towards many other persons besides Faustina. In short, the condition of the empire at home was not good, and the disasters abroad were great: the plague must have remained in Italy and in the West; Africa it did not visit, as may be seen from the writings of Tertullian. It is the same plague as that which is met with again under Commodus; nor are there any grounds for doubting the statement of Dio, who was a Roman senator, that two thousand men were buried every day at Rome. The population had in some measure recovered its losses since the times of Augustus, under whom it had very much dwindled, but there was now again as awful a destruction of life.