[61] Caillié, op. cit. i. 352.
[62] See infra, on the [Subjection of Children].
At a higher stage of civilisation reverence for parents reaches its pitch, and the duty of maintaining them in their old age is taken for a matter of course. Among the present Hindus “it would certainly be regarded as a most disgraceful thing were a man who could do anything for the support of an aged father or mother to allow the burden of their maintenance to fall on strangers”;[63] and it is common for unmarried soldiers to stint themselves almost to starvation point, that they may send home money to their parents.[64] The priesthood of modern Buddhism teach that children shall “respect their parents, and perform all kinds of offices for them, even though they should have servants whom they could command to do all that they require.”[65] At ancient Athens, before a man could become a magistrate, evidence was to be produced that he had treated his parents properly; and a person who refused his parents food and dwelling lost his right of speaking in the national assembly.[66] According to the Icelandic Grágás, a man should maintain in the first place his mother, in the second his father, in the third his own children.[67] The Talmud enjoins the duty of maintaining parents;[68] and so does Muhammedan law, “if the parents are both poor and lastingly infirm, or both poor and insane.”[69]
[63] Wilkins, Modern Hinduism, p. 418.
[64] Monier Williams, Indian Wisdom, p. 440, n. 1.
[65] Hardy, op. cit. p. 494. Cf. ibid. p. 495.
[66] Schmidt, Ethik der alten Griechen, ii. 144.
[67] Grágás, Omaga-balkr, 1, vol. i. 232.
[68] Katz, Der wahre Talmudjude, p. 119.
[69] Sachau, op. cit. p. 17 sq.