o posterity.

_Fannius_. Of course that must be so, Laelius. But since you have
mentioned the word friendship, and we are at leisure, you would be doing
me a great kindness, and I expect Scaevola also, if you would do as it
is your habit to do when asked questions on other subjects, and tell
us your sentiments about friendship, its nature, and the rules to be
observed in regard to it.

_Scaevola_. I shall of course be delighted. Fannius has anticipated the
very request I was about to make. So you will be doing us both a great
favour.

5. _Laelius_. I should certainly have no objection if I felt confidence
in myself. For the theme is a noble one, and we are (as Fannius has
said) at leisure. But who am I? and what ability have I? What you
propose is all very well for professional philosophers, who are used,
particularly if Greeks, to have the subject for discussion proposed to
them on the spur of the moment. It is a task of considerable difficulty,
and requires no little practice. Therefore for a set discourse on
friendship you must go, I think, to professional lecturers. All I can
do is to urge on you to regard friendship as the greatest thing in the
world; for there is nothing which so fits in with our nature, or is so
exactly what we want in prosperity or adversity.

But I must at the very beginning lay down this principle--_friendship
can only exist between good men_. I do not, however, press this
too closely, like the philosophers who push their definitions to a
superfluous accuracy. They have truth on their side, perhaps, but it is
of no practical advantage. Those, I mean, who say that no one but the
"wise" is "good." Granted, by all means. But the "wisdom" they mean is
one to which no mortal ever yet attained. We must concern ourselves
with the facts of everyday life as we find it--not imaginary and
ideal perfections. Even Gaius Fannius, Manius Curius, and Tiberius
Coruncanius, whom our ancestors decided to be "wise," I could never
declare to be so according to their standard. Let them, then, keep
this word "wisdom" to themselves. Everybody is irritated by it; no one
understands what it means. Let them but grant that the men I mentioned
were "good." No, they won't do that either. No one but the "wise" can be
allowed that title, say they. Well, then, let us dismiss them and manage
as best we may with our own poor mother wit, as the phrase is.

We mean then by the "good" _those whose actions and lives leave no