按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！
everything to sensual pleasure。 And no wonder。 Men who have
degraded all their powers of thought to an object so mean and
contemptible can of course raise their eyes to nothing lofty； to
nothing grand and divine。 Such persons indeed let us leave out of
the present question。 And let us accept the doctrine that the
sensation of love and the warmth of inclination have their origin in
a spontaneous feeling which arises directly the presence of probity
is indicated。 When once men have conceived the inclination； they
of course try to attach themselves to the object of it； and move
themselves nearer and nearer to him。 Their aim is that they may be
on the same footing and the same level in regard to affection； and
be more inclined to do a good service than to ask a return； and that
there should be this noble rivalry between them。 Thus both truths
will be established。 We shall get the most important material
advantages from friendship； and its origin from a natural impulse
rather than from a sense of need will be at once more dignified and
more in accordance with fact。 For if it were true that its material
advantages cemented friendship； it would be equally true that any
change in them would dissolve it。 But nature being incapable of
change； it follows that genuine friendships are eternal。
So much for the origin of friendship。 But perhaps you would not
care to hear any more。
_Fannius_。 Nay； pray go on； let us have the rest； Laelius。 I take on
myself to speak for my friend here as his senior。
_Scaevola_。 Quite right！ Therefore； pray let us hear。
10。 _Loelius_。 Well； then； my good friends； listen to some
conversations about friendship which very frequently passed
between Scipio and myself。 I must begin by telling you； however；
that be used to say that the most difficult thing in the world was for
a friendship to remain unimpaired to the end of life。 So many
things might intervene： conflicting interests； differences of opinion
in politics； frequent changes in character； owing sometimes to
misfortunes； sometimes to advancing years。 He used to illustrate
these facts from the analogy of boyhood； since the warmest
affections between boys are often laid aside with the boyish toga；
and even if they did manage to keep them up to adolescence； they
were sometimes broken by a rivalry in courtship； or for some other
advantage to which their mutual claims were not compatible。
Even if the friendship was prolonged beyond that time； yet it
frequently received a rude shock should the two happen to be
competitors for office。 For while the most fatal blow to friendship
in the majority of cases was the lust of gold； in the case of the best
men it was a rivalry for office and reputation； by which it had
often happened that the most violent enmity had arisen between
the closest friends。
Again； wide breaches and； for the most part； justifiable ones were
caused by an immoral request being made of friends； to pander to
a man's unholy desires or to assist him in inflicting a wrong。 A
refusal； though perfectly right； is attacked by those to whom they
refuse compliance as a violation of the laws of friendship。 Now the
people who have no scruples as to the requests they make to their
friends； thereby allow that they are ready to have no scruples as to
what they will do for their friends； and it is the recriminations of
such people which commonly not only quench friendships； but
give rise to lasting enmities。 〃 In fact；〃 he used to say； 〃these
fatalities overhang friendship in such numbers that it requires not
only wisdom but good luck also to escape them all。〃
11。 With these premises； then； let us first； if you please； examine
the question…how far ought personal feeling to go in friendship？
For instance： suppose Coriolanus to have had friends； ought they to
have joined him in invading his country？ Again； in the case of
Vecellinus or Spurius Maelius； ought their friends to have assisted
them in their attempt to establish a tyranny？ Take two instances of
either line of conduct。 When Tiberius Gracchus attempted his
revolutionary measures he was deserted； as we saw； by Quintus
Tubero and the friends of his own standing。 On the other hand； a
friend of your own family； Scaevola； Gains Blossius of Cumae；
took a different course。 I was acting as assessor to the consuls
Laenas and Rupilius to try the conspirators； and Blossius pleaded
for my pardon on the ground that his regard for Tiberius Gracchus
had been so high that he looked upon his wishes as law。 〃Even if
he had wished you to set fire to the Capitol？〃 said I。 〃That is a
thing；〃 he replied； 〃that he never would have wished。〃 〃Ah； but if
he had wished it？〃 said I。 〃I would have obeyed。〃 The wickedness
of such a speech needs no comment。 And in point of fact he was
as good and better than his word for he did not wait for orders in
the audacious proceedings of Tiberius Gracchus； but was the head
and front of them； and was a leader rather than an abettor of his
madness。 The result of his infatuation was that he fled to Asia；
terrified by the special commission appointed to try him； joined
the enemies of his country； and paid a penalty to the republic as
heavy as it was deserved。 I conclude； then； that the plea of having
acted in the interests of a friend is not a valid excuse for a wrong
action。 For； seeing that a belief in a man's virtue is the original
cause of friendship； friendship can hardly remain if virtue he
abandoned。 But if we decide it to be right to grant our friends
whatever they wish； and to ask them for whatever we wish； perfect
wisdom must be assumed on both sides if no mischief is to
happen。 But we cannot assume this perfect wisdom； for we are
speaking only of such friends as are ordinarily to be met with；
whether we have actually seen them or have been told about
them…men； that is to say； of everyday life。 I must quote some
examples of such persons； taking care to select such as approach
nearest to our standard of wisdom。 We read； for instance； that
Papus Aemilius was a close friend of Gaius Luscinus。 History tells
us that they were twice consuls together； and colleagues in the
censorship。 Again； it is on record that Manius Curius and Tiberius
Coruncanius were on the most intimate terms with them and with
each other。 Now； we cannot even suspect that any one of these
men ever asked of his friend anything that militated against his
honour or his oath or the interests of the republic。 In the case of
such men as these there is no point in saying that one of them
would not have obtained such a request if he had made it； for they
were men of the most scrupulous piety； and the making of such a
request would involve a breach of religious obligation no less than
the granting it。 However； it is quite true that Gaius Carbo and
Gaius Cato did follow Tiberius Gracchus； and though his brother
Caius Gracchus did not do so at the time； he is now the most eager
of them all。
12。 We may then lay down this rule of friendship…neither ask nor
consent to do what is wrong。 For the plea 〃for friendship's sake〃 is
a discreditable one； and not to be admitted for a moment。 This
rule holds good for all wrong…doing； but more especially in such as
involves disloyalty to the republic。 For things have come to such a
point with us； my dear Fannius and Scaevola； that we are bound to
look somewhat far ahead to what is likely to happen to the
republic。 The constitution； as known to our ancestors； has already
swerved somewhat from the regular course and the lines marked
out for it。 Tiberius Gracchus made an attempt to obtain the power
of a king； or； I might rather say； enjoyed that power for a few
months。 Had the Roman people ever heard or seen the like before？
What the friends and connexions that followed him； even after his
death； have succeeded in doing in the case of Publius Scipio I
cannot describe without tears。 As for Carbo； thanks to the
punishment recently inflicted on Tiberius Gracchus； we have by
hook or by crook managed to hold out against his attacks。 But
what to expect of the tribuneship of Caius Gracchus I do not like
to forecast。 One thing leads to another； and once set going； the
downward course proceeds with ever…increasing velocity。 There is
the case of the ballot： what a blow was inflicted first by the lex
Gabinia； and two years afterwards by the lex Cassia！ I seem
already to see the people estranged from the Senate； and the most
important affairs at the mercy of the multitude。 For you may be
sure that more people will learn how to set such things in motion
than how to stop them。 What is the point of these remarks？ This：
no one ever makes any attempt of this sort without friends to help
him。 We must therefore impress upon good men that； should they
become inevitably involved in friendships with men of this kind；
they ought not to consider themselves under any obligation to
stand by friends who are disloyal to the republic。 Bad men must
have the fear of punishment before their eyes： a punishment not
less severe for those who follow than for those who lead others to
crime。 Who was more famous and powerful in Greece than
Themistocles？ At the head of th