4
I remember, for instance, that in Rome I undertook to arbitrate between two brothers, of whom one had the reputation of being a philosopher. But he was, as it appears, not only as a brother but also as a philosopher, masquerading under a false name and appellation; for when I asked him to conduct himself as brother to brother and as philosopher to layman, What you say, said he, as to his being a layman, is correct, but I account it no momentous or important matter to have sprung from the same loins. As for you, said I, it is obvious that you consider it no important or momentous matter to have sprung from any loins at all. But certainly all other philosophers, even if they do not think so, at least do affirm with constant iteration that both Nature and the Law, which upholds Nature, have assigned to parents, after gods, first and greatest honour Cf. Commentarii in Hesiodum, 65 (Bernardakis, vol. vii. p. 84), on Works and Days, 707.; and there is nothing which men do that is more acceptable to gods than with goodwill and zeal to repay to those who bore them and brought them up the favours long ago lent to them when they were young. Plato, Laws, 717 c; cf. 496 c, infra. Nor is there, again, a greater exhibition of an impious nature than neglect of parents or offences against them. Therefore, while we are forbidden to do wrong to all others, yet to our mother and father, if we do not always afford, both in deed and in word, matter for their pleasure, even if offence be not present, men consider it unholy and unlawful. Hence what deed or favour or disposition, which children may show toward their parents, can give more pleasure than steadfast goodwill and friendship toward a brother?
