comes
into court with an escort of friends; he who denounces a poisoner is
unusually careful as to what he eats; he who accuses a thief sets a
guard over his possessions. But for the man who exposes a magician,
credited with such awful powers, to the danger of a capital sentence,
how can escort or precaution or watchmen save him from unforeseen and
inevitable disaster? Nothing can save him, and therefore the man who
believes in the truth of such a charge as this is certainly the last
person in the world who should bring such an accusation.

27. But it is a common and general error of the uninitiated to bring
the following accusations against philosophers. Some of them think
that those who explore the origins and elements of material things are
irreligious, and assert that they deny the existence of the gods.
Take, for instance, the cases of Anaxagoras, Leucippus, Democritus,
and Epicurus, and other natural philosophers. Others call those
magicians who bestow unusual care on the investigation of the workings
of providence and unusual devotion on their worship of the gods, as
though, forsooth, they knew _how_ to perform everything that they know
actually to _be_ performed. So Epimenides, Orpheus, Pythagoras, and
Ostanes were regarded as magicians, while a similar suspicion attached
to the 'purifications' of Empedocles, the 'demon' of Socrates and the
'good' of Plato. I congratulate myself therefore on being admitted to
such distinguished company.

I fear, however, Maximus, that you may regard the empty, ridiculous
and childish[9] fictions which my opponents have advanced in support
of their case as serious charges merely because they have been put
forward. 'Why,' says my accuser, 'have you sought out particular kinds
of fish?' Why should not a philosopher be permitted to do for the
satisfaction of his desire for knowledge what the _gourmand_, is
permitted to do for the satisfaction of his gluttony? 'What,' he asks,
'induced a free woman to marry you after thirteen years of widowhood?'
'Surely,' I answer, 'it is more remarkable that she should have
remained a widow so long.' 'Why, before she married you, did she
express certain opinions in a letter?' 'Is it reasonable,' I ask, 'to
demand of any one the reasons of another person's private opinions?'
'But,' he goes on, 'although she was your senior in years, she did not
despise your youth.' Surely this simply serves to show that there was
no need of magic to induce a woman