De parasito sive artem esse parasiticam
Lucian of Samosata
Lucian, Vol. 3. Harmon, A. M., editor. London: William Heinemann, Ltd.; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1921.
Again, nobody could accuse a parasite of adultery or assault or larceny or any other offence at all, since a man of that character would be no parasite; he wrongs himself. Therefore if he should commit adultery, for instance, along with the offence he acquires the name that goes withit. Just as a good man who behaves badly thereby acquires the name of bad instead of good, so, I take it, if the parasite commits any offence, he loses his identity and becomes identified with his offence. But not only are we ourselves aware of such offences on the part of rhetoricians and philosophers committed without
v.3.p.311
number in our times, but we also possess records of their misdeeds left behind in books. And there are speeches in defence of Socrates, Aeschines, Hyperides, Demosthenes, and very nearly the majority of orators and sages, whereas there is no speech in defence of a parasite, and nobody can cite a suit that has been brought against a parasite.