Montaigne--De L'amitié
When Lelius in the presence of the Romane Consuls,
who after the condemnation of Tiberius Gracchus,
pursued all those that had beene of his acquaintance,
came to enquire of Caius Blosius
(who was one of his chiefest friends)
what he would have done for him,
and that he answered, “All things.”
“What, all things?” replied he.
“And what if he had willed thee to burne our Temples?”
Blosius answered, “He would never have commanded such a thing.”
“But what if he had done it?” replied Lelius.
The other answered, “I would have obeyed him.”
If hee were so perfect a friend to Gracchus as Histories report,
he needed not offend the Consuls with this last and bold confession,
and should not have departed from the assurance hee had of Gracchus his minde.
But yet those who accuse this answer as seditious,
understand not well this mysterie:
and doe not presuppose in what termes he stood,
and that he held Gracchus his will in his sleeve, both by power and knowledge.
They were rather friends than Citizens,
rather friends than enemies of their countrey,
or friends of ambition and trouble.
Having absolutely committed themselves one to another,
they perfectly held the reines of one anothers inclination:
and let this yoke be guided by vertue and conduct of reason
(because without them it is altogether impossible to combine and proportion the same).
The answer of Blosius was such as it should be.
If their affections miscarried, according to my meaning,
they were neither friends one to other, nor friends to themselves.
As for the rest, this answer sounds no more than mine would doe,
to him that would in such sort enquire of me;
if your will should command you to kill your daughter,
would you doe it? and that I should consent unto it:
for, that beareth no witnesse of consent to doe it;
because I am not in doubt of my will, and as little of such a friends will.
It is not in the power of the worlds discourse to remove me
from the certaintie I have of his intentions and judgments of mine:
no one of its actions might be presented unto me, under what shape soever,
but I would presently finde the spring and motion of it.
Our mindes have jumped so unitedly together,
they have with so fervent an affection considered of each other,
and with like affection so discovered and sounded,
even to the very bottome of each others heart and entrails,
that I did not only know his, as well as mine owne,
but I would (verily) rather have trusted him
concerning any matter of mine, than my selfe.
Let no man compare any of the other common friendships to this.
I have as much knowledge of them as another, yea of the perfectest of their kinde:
yet wil I not perswade any man to confound their rules, for so a man might be deceived.
In these other strict friendships a man must march
with the bridle of wisdome and precaution in his hand:
the bond is not so strictly tied but a man may in some sort distrust the same.
Love him (said Chilon) as if you should one day hate him againe.
Hate him as if you should love him againe.
This precept, so abhominable in this soveraigne and mistris Amitie,
is necessarie and wholesome in the use of vulgar and customarie friendships:
toward which a man must employ the saying Aristotle was wont so often repeat,
“Oh you my friends, there is no perfect friend.”
who after the condemnation of Tiberius Gracchus,
pursued all those that had beene of his acquaintance,
came to enquire of Caius Blosius
(who was one of his chiefest friends)
what he would have done for him,
and that he answered, “All things.”
“What, all things?” replied he.
“And what if he had willed thee to burne our Temples?”
Blosius answered, “He would never have commanded such a thing.”
“But what if he had done it?” replied Lelius.
The other answered, “I would have obeyed him.”
If hee were so perfect a friend to Gracchus as Histories report,
he needed not offend the Consuls with this last and bold confession,
and should not have departed from the assurance hee had of Gracchus his minde.
But yet those who accuse this answer as seditious,
understand not well this mysterie:
and doe not presuppose in what termes he stood,
and that he held Gracchus his will in his sleeve, both by power and knowledge.
They were rather friends than Citizens,
rather friends than enemies of their countrey,
or friends of ambition and trouble.
Having absolutely committed themselves one to another,
they perfectly held the reines of one anothers inclination:
and let this yoke be guided by vertue and conduct of reason
(because without them it is altogether impossible to combine and proportion the same).
The answer of Blosius was such as it should be.
If their affections miscarried, according to my meaning,
they were neither friends one to other, nor friends to themselves.
As for the rest, this answer sounds no more than mine would doe,
to him that would in such sort enquire of me;
if your will should command you to kill your daughter,
would you doe it? and that I should consent unto it:
for, that beareth no witnesse of consent to doe it;
because I am not in doubt of my will, and as little of such a friends will.
It is not in the power of the worlds discourse to remove me
from the certaintie I have of his intentions and judgments of mine:
no one of its actions might be presented unto me, under what shape soever,
but I would presently finde the spring and motion of it.
Our mindes have jumped so unitedly together,
they have with so fervent an affection considered of each other,
and with like affection so discovered and sounded,
even to the very bottome of each others heart and entrails,
that I did not only know his, as well as mine owne,
but I would (verily) rather have trusted him
concerning any matter of mine, than my selfe.
Let no man compare any of the other common friendships to this.
I have as much knowledge of them as another, yea of the perfectest of their kinde:
yet wil I not perswade any man to confound their rules, for so a man might be deceived.
In these other strict friendships a man must march
with the bridle of wisdome and precaution in his hand:
the bond is not so strictly tied but a man may in some sort distrust the same.
Love him (said Chilon) as if you should one day hate him againe.
Hate him as if you should love him againe.
This precept, so abhominable in this soveraigne and mistris Amitie,
is necessarie and wholesome in the use of vulgar and customarie friendships:
toward which a man must employ the saying Aristotle was wont so often repeat,
“Oh you my friends, there is no perfect friend.”