I was drawing the conclusion that by rejecting what he was given and what was easily come to him, he was demonstrating that he felt there was some inherent value in hardship and the rejection of standard luxuries.

So basically I feel like he may have chosen to do without things in order to better appreciate the value of what he had. If that was part of his motivation, then (I concluded) his asceticism was a method to allow him to appreciate the value of what he did without (as well as what he allowed himself to keep).

I feel like someone who chooses to make his or her life more difficult does so because they see a value in hardship. To me it seems apparent that additional insight and appreciation for 'comforts' and 'easy things' are two benefits, two values, derived from choosing to appreciate hardship.

I feel like we might be coming at this as cart and horse here, or chicken and egg - whether he was wise because he was ascetic, or whether he was wise and so became ascetic.

By choosing to make life harder on himself he was able to learn more truly the value of some of what he experienced, instead of taking it for granted.

It seems a clear conclusion, to me, that someone might reject some of their inherited advantages and luxuries because they wanted to more truly understand the value of them.

Maybe what you are saying is that he rejected these luxuries because he had them and found them to be of no value. However, only a person who has always been afforded such luxuries would do such a thing. To a slave it is easy to see the value of being an emperor's son.

Sure, the emperor's son might appreciate the 'valuable lessons' of hard work and slavery, but he says that from the seat of someone who has never truly experienced it and, no matter how ascetic, cannot/will not.

I don't think these things are equal evils/in value. Who do you feel worse for: the ugly girl who is upset she is ugly and never gets dates, or the pretty girl who is upset because being pretty is a hassle and everyone hits on her? Sure, if Marcus was the pretty girl he would cut his hair and dress real ugly and maybe scar his face if he's going to be really extreme about it, but at the end of the day he's still the pretty girl. That's his advantage: he can go home, take off his sackcloth and ashes, and return to being a prince any time he wants. Even if he never chooses to, the option is a comfort and a luxury that a truly impoverished person understands the value of because they don't have it.

I'm not sure I'm proving points here anymore, but I'm trying.