{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_35460/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_35460","id":"gutenberg_35460","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/35460","summary":null,"tags":["Apollonius, of Tyana","Category: Biographies","Category: History - Ancient","Category: Philosophy & Ethics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Philosophers -- Greece -- Biography","Philosophy, Ancient -- Oriental influences"],"text":"</pre>\n\n\n\nProduced by Delphine Lettau, Turgut Dincer and the Online\nDistributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This\nfile was produced from images generously made available\nby The Internet Archive/Canadian Libraries)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n  APOLLONIUS OF TYANA\n\n  THE PHILOSOPHER-REFORMER\n  OF THE FIRST CENTURY A.D.\n\n  A CRITICAL STUDY OF THE ONLY EXISTING\n  RECORD OF HIS LIFE WITH SOME ACCOUNT\n  OF THE WAR OF OPINION CONCERNING HIM\n  AND AN INTRODUCTION ON THE RELIGIOUS\n  ASSOCIATIONS AND BROTHERHOODS OF THE\n  TIMES AND THE POSSIBLE INFLUENCE OF\n  INDIAN THOUGHT ON GREECE--BY G. R. S.\n  MEAD, B.A., M.R.A.S.\n\n\n  LONDON AND BENARES\n  THEOSOPHICAL PUBLISHING SOCIETY\n  1901\n\n\n  TABLE OF CONTENTS.\n\n\n  SECTION                                                   PAGE\n\n      I. INTRODUCTORY                                          1\n\n     II. THE RELIGIOUS ASSOCIATIONS AND COMMUNITIES\n        OF THE FIRST CENTURY                                   9\n\n    III. INDIA AND GREECE                                     17\n\n     IV. THE APOLLONIUS OF EARLY OPINION                      28\n\n      V. TEXTS, TRANSLATIONS, AND LITERATURE                  42\n\n     VI. THE BIOGRAPHER OF APOLLONIUS                         53\n\n    VII. EARLY LIFE                                           65\n\n   VIII. THE TRAVELS OF APOLLONIUS                            73\n\n     IX. IN THE SHRINES OF THE TEMPLES AND THE\n           RETREATS OF RELIGION                               82\n\n      X. THE GYMNOSOPHISTS OF UPPER EGYPT                     99\n\n     XI. APOLLONIUS AND THE RULERS OF THE EMPIRE             106\n\n    XII. APOLLONIUS THE PROPHET AND WONDER-WORKER            110\n\n   XIII. HIS MODE OF LIFE                                    119\n\n    XIV. HIMSELF AND HIS CIRCLE                              126\n\n     XV. FROM HIS SAYINGS AND SERMONS                        132\n\n    XVI. FROM HIS LETTERS                                    145\n\n   XVII. THE WRITINGS OF APOLLONIUS                          153\n\n  XVIII. BIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES                               156\n\n\n\n\nAPOLLONIUS OF TYANA.\n\n\nSECTION I.\n\nINTRODUCTORY.\n\n\nTo the student of the origins of Christianity there is naturally no\nperiod of Western history of greater interest and importance than the\nfirst century of our era; and yet how little comparatively is known\nabout it of a really definite and reliable nature. If it be a subject of\nlasting regret that no non-Christian writer of the first century had\nsufficient intuition of the future to record even a line of information\nconcerning the birth and growth of what was to be the religion of the\nWestern world, equally disappointing is it to find so little definite\ninformation of the general social and religious conditions of the time.\nThe rulers and the wars of the Empire seem to have formed the chief\ninterest of the historiographers of the succeeding century, and even in\nthis department of political history, though the public acts of the\nEmperors may be fairly well known, for we can check them by records and\ninscriptions, when we come to their private acts and motives we find\nourselves no longer on the ground of history, but for the most part in\nthe atmosphere of prejudice, scandal, and speculation. The political\nacts of Emperors and their officers, however, can at best throw but a\ndim side-light on the general social conditions of the time, while they\nshed no light at all on the religious conditions, except so far as these\nin any particular contacted the domain of politics. As well might we\nseek to reconstruct a picture of the religious life of the time from\nImperial acts and rescripts, as endeavour to glean any idea of the\nintimate religion of this country from a perusal of statute books or\nreports of Parliamentary debates.\n\nThe Roman histories so-called, to which we have so far been accustomed,\ncannot help us in the reconstruction of a picture of the environment\ninto which, on the one hand, Paul led the new faith in Asia Minor,\nGreece, and Rome; and in which, on the other, it already found itself in\nthe districts bordering on the south-east of the Mediterranean. It is\nonly by piecing together laboriously isolated scraps of information and\nfragments of inscriptions, that we become aware of the existence of the\nlife of a world of religious associations and private cults which\nexisted at this period. Not that even so we have any very direct\ninformation of what went on in these associations, guilds, and\nbrotherhoods; but we have sufficient evidence to make us keenly regret\nthe absence of further knowledge.\n\nDifficult as this field is to till, it is exceedingly fertile in\ninterest, and it is to be regretted that comparatively so little work\nhas as yet been done in it; and that, as is so frequently the case, the\nwork which has been done is, for the most part, not accessible to the\nEnglish reader. What work has been done on this special subject may be\nseen from the bibliographical note appended to this essay, in which is\ngiven a list of books and articles treating of the religious\nassociations among the Greeks and Romans. But if we seek to obtain a\ngeneral view of the condition of religious affairs in the first century\nwe find ourselves without a reliable guide; for of works dealing with\nthis particular subject there are few, and from them we learn little\nthat does not immediately concern, or is thought to concern,\nChristianity; whereas, it is just the state of the non-Christian\nreligious world about which, in the present case, we desire to be\ninformed.\n\nIf, for instance, the reader turn to works of general history, such as\nMerivale's History of the Romans under the Empire (London; last ed.\n1865), he will find, it is true, in chap. iv., a description of the\nstate of religion up to the death of Nero, but he will be little wiser\nfor perusing it. If he turn to Hermann Schiller's Geschichte der\nr\u00f6mischen Kaiserreichs unter der Regierung des Nero (Berlin; 1872), he\nwill find much reason for discarding the vulgar opinions about the\nmonstrous crimes imputed to Nero, as indeed he might do by reading in\nEnglish G. H. Lewes' article \"Was Nero a Monster?\" (Cornhill Magazine;\nJuly, 1863)--and he will also find (bk. IV. chap. iii.) a general view\nof the religion and philosophy of the time which is far more intelligent\nthan that of Merivale's; but all is still very vague and unsatisfactory,\nand we feel ourselves still outside the intimate life of the\nphilosophers and religionists of the first century.\n\nIf, again, he turn to the latest writers of Church history who have\ntreated this particular question, he will find that they are occupied\nentirely with the contact of the Christian Church with the Roman Empire,\nand only incidentally give us any information of the nature of which we\nare in search. On this special ground C. J. Neumann, in his careful\nstudy Der r\u00f6mische Staat und die allgemeine Kirche bis auf Diocletian\n(Leipzig; 1890), is interesting; while Prof. W. M. Ramsay, in The Church\nin the Roman Empire before A.D. 170 (London; 1893), is extraordinary,\nfor he endeavours to interpret Roman history by the New Testament\ndocuments, the dates of the majority of which are so hotly disputed.\n\nBut, you may say, what has all this to do with Apollonius of Tyana? The\nanswer is simple: Apollonius lived in the first century; his work lay\nprecisely among these religious associations, colleges, and guilds. A\nknowledge of them and their nature would give us the natural environment\nof a great part of his life; and information as to their condition in\nthe first century would perhaps help us the better to understand some of\nthe reasons for the task which he attempted.\n\nIf, however, it were only the life and endeavours of Apollonius which\nwould be illuminated by this knowledge, we could understand why so\nlittle effort has been spent in this direction; for the character of the\nTyanean, as we shall see, has since the fourth century been regarded\nwith little favour even by the few, while the many have been taught to\nlook upon our philosopher not only as a charlatan, but even as an\nanti-Christ. But when it is just a knowledge of these religious\nassociations and orders which would throw a flood of light on the\nearliest evolution of Christianity, not only with regard to the Pauline\ncommunities, but also with regard to those schools which were\nsubsequently condemned as heretical, it is astonishing that we have had\nno more satisfactory work done on the subject.\n\nIt may be said, however, that this information is not forthcoming simply\nbecause it is unprocurable. To a large extent this is true;\nnevertheless, a great deal more could be done than has as yet been\nattempted, and the results of research in special directions and in the\nbyways of history could be combined, so that the non-specialist could\nobtain some general idea of the religious conditions of the times, and\nso be less inclined to join in the now stereotyped condemnation of all\nnon-Jewish or non-Christian moral and religious effort in the Roman\nEmpire of the first century.\n\nBut the reader may retort: Things social and religious in those days\nmust have been in a very parlous state, for, as this essay shows,\nApollonius himself spent the major part of his life in trying to reform\nthe institutions and cults of the Empire. To this we answer: No doubt\nthere was much to reform, and when is there not? But it would not only\nbe not generous, but distinctly mischievous for us to judge our fellows\nof those days solely by the lofty standard of an ideal morality, or even\nto scale them against the weight of our own supposed virtues and\nknowledge. Our point is not that there was nothing to reform, far from\nthat, but that the wholesale accusations of depravity brought against\nthe times will not bear impartial investigation. On the contrary, there\nwas much good material ready to be worked up in many ways, and if there\nhad not been, how could there among other things have been any\nChristianity?\n\nThe Roman Empire was at the zenith of its power, and had there not been\nmany admirable administrators and men of worth in the governing caste,\nsuch a political consummation could never have been reached and\nmaintained. Moreover, as ever previously in the ancient world, religious\nliberty was guaranteed, and where we find persecution, as in the reigns\nof Nero and Domitian, it must be set down to political and not to\ntheological reasons. Setting aside the disputed question of the\npersecution of the Christians under Domitian, the Neronian persecution\nwas directed against those whom the Imperial power regarded as Jewish\npolitical revolutionaries. So, too, when we find the philosophers\nimprisoned or banished from Rome during these two reigns, it was not\nbecause they were philosophers, but because the ideal of some of them\nwas the restoration of the Republic, and this rendered them obnoxious to\nthe charge not only of being political malcontents, but also of actively\nplotting against the Emperor's _majestas_. Apollonius, however, was\nthroughout a warm supporter of monarchical rule. When, then, we hear of\nthe philosophers being banished from Rome or being cast into prison, we\nmust remember that this was not a wholesale persecution of philosophy\nthroughout the Empire; and when we say that some of them desired to\nrestore the Republic, we should remember that the vast majority of them\nrefrained from politics, and especially was this the case with the\ndisciples of the religio-philosophical schools.\n\n\n\n\nSECTION II.\n\nTHE RELIGIOUS ASSOCIATIONS AND COMMUNITIES OF THE FIRST CENTURY.\n\n\nIn the domain of religion it is quite true that the state cults and\nnational institutions throughout the Empire were almost without\nexception in a parlous state, and it is to be noticed that Apollonius\ndevoted much time and labour to reviving and purifying them. Indeed,\ntheir strength had long left the general state-institutions of religion,\nwhere all was now perfunctory; but so far from there being no religious\nlife in the land, in proportion as the official cultus and ancestral\ninstitutions afforded no real satisfaction to their religious needs, the\nmore earnestly did the people devote themselves to private cults, and\neagerly baptised themselves in all that flood of religious enthusiasm\nwhich flowed in with ever increasing volume from the East. Indubitably\nin all this fermentation there were many excesses, according to our\npresent notions of religious decorum, and also grievous abuses; but at\nthe same time in it many found due satisfaction for their religious\nemotions, and, if we except those cults which were distinctly vicious,\nwe have to a large extent before us in popular circles the spectacle of\nwhat, in their last analysis, are similar phenomena to those enthusiasms\nwhich in our own day may be frequently witnessed among such sects as the\nShakers or Ranters, and at the general revival meetings of the\nuninstructed.\n\nIt is not, however, to be thought that the private cults and the doings\nof the religious associations were all of this nature or confined to\nthis class; far from it. There were religious brotherhoods, communities,\nand clubs--_thiasi_, _erani_, and _orge[=o]nes_--of all sorts and\nconditions. There were also mutual benefit societies, burial clubs, and\ndining companies, the prototypes of our present-day Masonic bodies,\nOddfellows, and the rest. These religious associations were not only\nprivate in the sense that they were not maintained by the State, but\nalso for the most part they were private in the sense that what they did\nwas kept secret, and this is perhaps the main reason why we have so\ndefective a record of them.\n\nAmong them are to be numbered not only the lower forms of mystery-cultus\nof various kinds, but also the greater ones, such as the Phrygian,\nBacchic, Isiac, and Mithriac Mysteries, which were spread everywhere\nthroughout the Empire. The famous Eleusinia were, however, still under\nthe \u00e6gis of the State, but though so famous were, as a state-cultus, far\nmore perfunctory.\n\nIt is, moreover, not to be thought that the great types of\nmystery-cultus above mentioned were uniform even among themselves. There\nwere not only various degrees and grades within them, but also in all\nprobability many forms of each line of tradition, good, bad, and\nindifferent. For instance, we know that it was considered _de rigueur_\nfor every respectable citizen of Athens to be initiated into the\nEleusinia, and therefore the tests could not have been very stringent;\nwhereas in the most recent work on the subject, De Apuleio Isiacorum\nMysteriorum Teste (Leyden; 1900), Dr. K. H. E. De Jong shows that in one\nform of the Isiac Mysteries the candidate was invited to initiation by\nmeans of dream; that is to say, he had to be psychically impressionable\nbefore his acceptance.\n\nHere, then, we have a vast intermediate ground for religious exercise\nbetween the most popular and undisciplined forms of private cults and\nthe highest forms, which could only be approached through the discipline\nand training of the philosophic life. The higher side of these\nmystery-institutions aroused the enthusiasm of all that was best in\nantiquity, and unstinted praise was given to one or another form of them\nby the greatest thinkers and writers of Greece and Rome; so that we\ncannot but think that here the instructed found that satisfaction for\ntheir religious needs which was necessary not only for those who could\nnot rise into the keen air of pure reason, but also for those who had\nclimbed so high upon the heights of reason that they could catch a\nglimpse of the other side. The official cults were notoriously unable to\ngive them this satisfaction, and were only tolerated by the instructed\nas an aid for the people and a means of preserving the traditional life\nof the city or state.\n\nBy common consent the most virtuous livers of Greece were the members of\nthe Pythagorean schools, both men and women. After the death of their\nfounder the Pythagoreans seem to have gradually blended with the Orphic\ncommunities, and the \"Orphic life\" was the recognised term for a life of\npurity and self-denial. We also know that the Orphics, and therefore the\nPythagoreans, were actively engaged in the reformation, or even the\nentire reforming, of the Baccho-Eleusinian rites; they seem to have\nbrought back the pure side of the Bacchic cult with their reinstitution\nor reimportation of the Iacchic mysteries, and it is very evident that\nsuch stern livers and deep thinkers could not have been contented with a\nlow form of cult. Their influence also spread far and wide in general\nBacchic circles, so that we find Euripides putting the following words\ninto the mouth of a chorus of Bacchic initiates: \"Clad in white robes I\nspeed me from the genesis of mortal men, and never more approach the\nvase of death, for I have done with eating food that ever housed a\nsoul.\"[1] Such words could well be put into the mouth of a Br[=a]hman or\nBuddhist ascetic, eager to escape from the bonds of Sa[.m]s[=a]ra and\nsuch men cannot therefore justly be classed together indiscriminately\nwith ribald revellers--the general mind-picture of a Bacchic company.\n\nBut, some one may say, Euripides and the Pythagoreans and Orphics are no\nevidence for the first century; whatever good there may have been in\nsuch schools and communities, it had ceased long before. On the\ncontrary, the evidence is all against this objection. Philo, writing\nabout 25 A.D., tells us that in his day numerous groups of men, who in\nall respects led this life of religion, who abandoned their property,\nretired from the world and devoted themselves entirely to the search for\nwisdom and the cultivation of virtue, were scattered far and wide\nthroughout the world. In his treatise, On the Contemplative Life, he\nwrites: \"This natural class of men is to be found in many parts of the\ninhabited world, both the Grecian and non-Grecian world, sharing in the\nperfect good. In Egypt there are crowds of them in every province, or\nnome as they call it, and especially round Alexandria.\" This is a most\nimportant statement, for if there were so many devoted to the religious\nlife at this time, it follows that the age was not one of unmixed\ndepravity.\n\nIt is not, however, to be thought that these communities were all of an\nexactly similar nature, or of one and the same origin, least of all that\nthey were all Therapeut or Essene. We have only to remember the various\nlines of descent of the doctrines held by the innumerable schools\nclassed together as Gnostic, as sketched in my recent work, Fragments of\na Faith Forgotten, and to turn to the beautiful treatises of the\nHermetic schools, to persuade us that in the first century the striving\nafter the religious and philosophic life was wide-spread and various.\n\nWe are not, however, among those who believe that the origin of the\nTherapeut communities of Philo and of the Essenes of Philo and Josephus\nis to be traced to Orphic and Pythagorean influence. The question of\nprecise origin is as yet beyond the power of historical research, and\nwe are not of those who would exaggerate one element of the mass into a\nuniversal source. But when we remember the existence of all these so\nwidely scattered communities in the first century, when we study the\nimperfect but important record of the very numerous schools and\nbrotherhoods of a like nature which came into intimate contact with\nChristianity in its origins, we cannot but feel that there was the\nleaven of a strong religious life working in many parts of the Empire.\n\nOur great difficulty is that these communities, brotherhoods, and\nassociations kept themselves apart, and with rare exceptions left no\nrecords of their intimate practices and beliefs, or if they left any it\nhas been destroyed or lost. For the most part then we have to rely upon\ngeneral indications of a very superficial character. But this imperfect\nrecord is no justification for us to deny or ignore their existence and\nthe intensity of their endeavours; and a history which purports to paint\na picture of the times is utterly insufficient so long as it omits this\nmost vital subject from its canvas.\n\nAmong such surroundings as these Apollonius moved; but how little does\nhis biographer seem to have been aware of the fact! Philostratus has a\nrhetorician's appreciation of a philosophical court life, but no\nfeeling for the life of religion. It is only indirectly that the Life of\nApollonius, as it is now depicted, can throw any light on these most\ninteresting communities, but even an occasional side-light is precious\nwhere all is in such obscurity. Were it but possible to enter into the\nliving memory of Apollonius, and see with his eyes the things he saw\nwhen he lived nineteen hundred years ago, what an enormously interesting\npage of the world's history could be recovered! He not only traversed\nall the countries where the new faith was taking root, but he lived for\nyears in most of them, and was intimately acquainted with numbers of\nmystic communities in Egypt, Arabia, and Syria. Surely he must have\nvisited some of the earliest Christian communities as well, must even\nhave conversed with some of the \"disciples of the Lord\"! And yet no word\nis breathed of this, not one single scrap of information on these points\ndo we glean from what is recorded of him. Surely he must have met with\nPaul, if not elsewhere, then at Rome, in 66, when he had to leave\nbecause of the edict of banishment against the philosophers, the very\nyear according to some when Paul was beheaded!\n\n\n\n\nSECTION III.\n\nINDIA AND GREECE.\n\n\nThere is, however, another reason why Apollonius is of importance to us.\nHe was an enthusiastic admirer of the wisdom of India. Here again a\nsubject of wide interest opens up. What influences, if any, had\nBr[=a]hmanism and Buddhism on Western thought in these early years? It\nis strongly asserted by some that they had great influence; it is as\nstrongly denied by others that they had any influence at all. It is,\ntherefore, apparent that there is no really indisputable evidence on the\nsubject.\n\nJust as some would ascribe the constitution of the Essene and Therapeut\ncommunities to Pythagorean influence, so others would ascribe their\norigin to Buddhist propaganda; and not only would they trace this\ninfluence in the Essene tenets and practices, but they would even refer\nthe general teaching of the Christ to a Buddhist source in a Jewish\nmonotheistic setting. Not only so, but some would have it that two\ncenturies before the direct general contact of Greece with India,\nbrought about by the conquests of Alexander, India through Pythagoras\nstrongly and lastingly influenced all subsequent Greek thought.\n\nThe question can certainly not be settled by hasty affirmation or\ndenial; it requires not only a wide knowledge of general history and a\nminute study of scattered and imperfect indications of thought and\npractice, but also a fine appreciation of the correct value of indirect\nevidence, for of direct testimony there is none of a really decisive\nnature. To such high qualifications we can make no pretension, and our\nhighest ambition is simply to give a few very general indications of the\nnature of the subject.\n\nIt is plainly asserted by the ancient Greeks that Pythagoras went to\nIndia, but as the statement is made by Neo-Pythagorean and Neo-Platonic\nwriters subsequent to the time of Apollonius, it is objected that the\ntravels of the Tyanean suggested not only this item in the biography of\nthe great Samian but several others, or even that Apollonius himself in\nhis Life of Pythagoras was father of the rumour. The close resemblance,\nhowever, between many of the features of Pythagorean discipline and\ndoctrine and Indo-Aryan thought and practice, make us hesitate entirely\nto reject the possibility of Pythagoras having visited ancient\n[=A]ry[=a]varta.\n\nAnd even if we cannot go so far as to entertain the possibility of\ndirect personal contact, there has to be taken into consideration the\nfact that Pherecydes, the master of Pythagoras, may have been acquainted\nwith some of the main ideas of Vaidic lore. Pherecydes taught at\nEphesus, but was himself most probably a Persian, and it is quite\ncredible that a learned Asiatic, teaching a mystic philosophy and basing\nhis doctrine upon the idea of rebirth, may have had some indirect, if\nnot direct, knowledge of Indo-Aryan thought.\n\nPersia must have been even at this time in close contact with India, for\nabout the date of the death of Pythagoras, in the reign of Dareius, son\nof Hystaspes, at the end of the sixth and beginning of the fifth century\nbefore our era, we hear of the expedition of the Persian general Scylax\ndown the Indus, and learn from Herodotus that in this reign India (that\nis the Punj[=a]b) formed the twentieth satrapy of the Persian monarchy.\nMoreover, Indian troops were among the hosts of Xerxes; they invaded\nThessaly and fought at Plat\u00e6a.\n\nFrom the time of Alexander onwards there was direct and constant contact\nbetween [=A]ry[=a]varta and the kingdoms of the successors of the\nworld-conqueror, and many Greeks wrote about this land of mystery; but\nin all that has come down to us we look in vain for anything but the\nvaguest indications of what the \"philosophers\" of India systematically\nthought.\n\nThat the Br[=a]hmans would at this time have permitted their sacred\nbooks to be read by the Yavanas (Ionians, the general name for Greeks in\nIndian records) is contrary to all we know of their history. The Yavanas\nwere Mlechchhas, outside the pale of the [=A]ryas, and all they could\nglean of the jealously guarded Brahm[=a]-vidy[=a] or theosophy must have\ndepended solely upon outside observation. But the dominant religious\nactivity at this time in India was Buddhist, and it is to this protest\nagainst the rigid distinctions of caste and race made by Br[=a]hmanical\npride, and to the startling novelty of an enthusiastic religious\npropaganda among all classes and races in India, and outside India to\nall nations, that we must look for the most direct contact of thought\nbetween India and Greece.\n\nFor instance, in the middle of the third century B.C., we know from\nAsoka's thirteenth edict, that this Buddhist Emperor of India, the\nConstantine of the East, sent missionaries to Antiochus II. of Syria,\nPtolemy II. of Egypt, Antigonus Gonatas of Macedonia, Magas of Cyrene,\nand Alexander II. of Epirus. When, in a land of such imperfect records,\nthe evidence on the side of India is so clear and indubitable, all the\nmore extraordinary is it that we have no direct testimony on our side of\nso great a missionary activity. Although, then, merely because of the\nabsence of all direct information from Greek sources, it is very unsafe\nto generalize, nevertheless from our general knowledge of the times it\nis not illegitimate to conclude that no great public stir could have\nbeen made by these pioneers of the Dharma in the West. In every\nprobability these Buddhist Bhik[s.]hus produced no effect on the rulers\nor on the people. But was their mission entirely abortive; and did\nBuddhist missionary enterprise westwards cease with them?\n\nThe answer to this question, as it seems to us, is hidden in the\nobscurity of the religious communities. We cannot, however, go so far as\nto agree with those who would cut the gordian knot by asserting\ndogmatically that the ascetic communities in Syria and Egypt were\nfounded by these Buddhist propagandists. Already even in Greece itself\nwere not only Pythagorean but even prior to them Orphic communities, for\neven on this ground we believe that Pythagoras rather developed what he\nfound already existing, than that he established something entirely new.\nAnd if they were found in Greece, much more then is it reasonable to\nsuppose that such communities already existed in Syria, Arabia, and\nEgypt, whose populations were given far more to religious exercises than\nthe sceptical and laughter-loving Greeks.\n\nIt is, however, credible that in such communities, if anywhere, Buddhist\npropaganda would find an appreciative and attentive audience; but even\nso it is remarkable that they have left no distinctly direct trace of\ntheir influence. Nevertheless, both by the sea way and by the great\ncaravan route there was an ever open line of communication between India\nand the Empire of the successors of Alexander; and it is even\npermissible to speculate, that if we could recover a catalogue of the\ngreat Alexandrian library, for instance, we should perchance find that\nin it Indian MSS. were to be found among the other rolls and parchments\nof the scriptures of the nations.\n\nIndeed, there are phrases in the oldest treatises of the Trismegistic\nHermetic literature which can be so closely paralleled with phrases in\nthe Upani[s.]hads and in the Bhagavad G[=i]t[=a], that one is almost\ntempted to believe that the writers had some acquaintance with the\ngeneral contents of these Br[=a]hmanical scriptures. The Trismegistic\nliterature had its genesis in Egypt, and its earliest deposit must be\ndated at least in the first century A.D., if it cannot even be pushed\nback earlier. Even more striking is the similarity between the lofty\nmystic metaphysic of the Gnostic doctor Basilides, who lived at the end\nof the first and beginning of the second century A.D., and Ved[=a]ntic\nideas. Moreover, both the Hermetic and the Basilidean schools and their\nimmediate predecessors were devoted to a stern self-discipline and deep\nphilosophical study which would make them welcome eagerly any\nphilosopher or mystic student who might come from the far East.\n\nBut even so, we are not of those who by their own self-imposed\nlimitations of possibility are condemned to find some direct physical\ncontact to account for a similarity of ideas or even of phrasing.\nGranting, for instance, that there is much resemblance between the\nteachings of the Dharma of the Buddha and of the Gospel of the Christ,\nand that the same spirit of love and gentleness pervades them both,\nstill there is no necessity to look for the reason of this resemblance\nto purely physical transmission. And so for other schools and other\nteachers; like conditions will produce similar phenomena; like effort\nand like aspiration will produce similar ideas, similar experience, and\nsimilar response. And this we believe to be the case in no general way,\nbut that it is all very definitely ordered from within by the servants\nof the real guardians of things religious in this world.\n\nWe are, then, not compelled to lay so much stress on the question of\nphysical transmission, or to be seeking even to find proof of copying.\nThe human mind in its various degrees is much the same in all climes and\nages, and its inner experience has a common ground into which seed may\nbe sown, as it is tilled and cleared of weeds. The good seed comes all\nfrom the same granary, and those who sow it pay no attention to the\nman-made outer distinctions of race and creed.\n\nHowever difficult, therefore, it may be to prove, from unquestionably\nhistorical statements, any direct influence of Indian thought on the\nconceptions and practices of some of these religious communities and\nphilosophic schools of the Gr\u00e6co-Roman Empire, and although in any\nparticular case similarity of ideas need not necessarily be assigned to\ndirect physical transmission, nevertheless the highest probability, if\nnot the greatest assurance, remains that even prior to the days of\nApollonius there was some private knowledge in Greece of the general\nideas of the Ved[=a]nta and Dharma; while in the case of Apollonius\nhimself, even if we discount nine-tenths of what is related of him, his\none idea seems to have been to spread abroad among the religious\nbrotherhoods and institutions of the Empire some portion of the wisdom\nwhich he brought back with him from India.\n\nWhen, then, we find at the end of the first and during the first half\nof the second century, among such mystic associations as the Hermetic\nand Gnostic schools, ideas which strongly remind us of the theosophy of\nthe Upani[s.]hads or the reasoned ethics of the Suttas, we have always\nto take into consideration not only the high probability of Apollonius\nhaving visited such schools, but also the possibility of his having\ndiscoursed at length therein on the Indian wisdom. Not only so, but the\nmemory of his influence may have lingered for long in such circles, for\ndo we not find Plotinus, the coryph\u00e6us of Neo-Platonism, as it is\ncalled, so enamoured with what he had heard of the wisdom of India at\nAlexandria, that in 242 he started off with the ill-starred expedition\nof Gordian to the East in the hope of reaching that land of philosophy?\nWith the failure of the expedition and assassination of the Emperor,\nhowever, he had to return, for ever disappointed of his hope.\n\nIt is not, however, to be thought that Apollonius set out to make a\npropaganda of Indian philosophy in the same way that the ordinary\nmissionary sets forth to preach his conception of the Gospel. By no\nmeans; Apollonius seems to have endeavoured to help his hearers, whoever\nthey might be, in the way best suited to each of them. He did not begin\nby telling them that what they believed was utterly false and\nsoul-destroying, and that their eternal welfare depended upon their\ninstantly adopting his own special scheme of salvation; he simply\nendeavoured to purge and further explain what they already believed and\npractised. That some strong power supported him in his ceaseless\nactivity, and in his almost world-wide task, is not so difficult of\nbelief; and it is a question of deep interest for those who strive to\npeer through the mists of appearance, to speculate how that not only a\nPaul but also an Apollonius was aided and directed in his task from\nwithin.\n\nThe day, however, has not yet dawned when it will be possible for the\ngeneral mind in the West to approach the question with such freedom from\nprejudice, as to bear the thought that, seen from within, not only Paul\nbut also Apollonius may well have been a \"disciple of the Lord\" in the\ntrue sense of the words; and that too although on the surface of things\ntheir tasks seem in many ways so dissimilar, and even, to theological\npreconceptions, entirely antagonistic.\n\nFortunately, however, even to-day there is an ever-growing number of\nthinking people who will not only not be shocked by such a belief, but\nwho will receive it with joy as the herald of the dawning of a true sun\nof righteousness, which will do more to illumine the manifold ways of\nthe religion of our common humanity than all the self-righteousness of\nany particular body of exclusive religionists.\n\nIt is, then, in this atmosphere of charity and tolerance that we would\nask the reader to approach the consideration of Apollonius and his\ndoings, and not only the life and deeds of an Apollonius, but also of\nall those who have striven to help their fellows the world over.\n\n\n\n\nSECTION IV.\n\nTHE APOLLONIUS OF EARLY OPINION.\n\n\nApollonius of Tyana[2] was the most famous philosopher of the\nGr\u00e6co-Roman world of the first century, and devoted the major part of\nhis long life to the purification of the many cults of the Empire and to\nthe instruction of the ministers and priests of its religions. With the\nexception of the Christ no more interesting personage appears upon the\nstage of Western history in these early years. Many and various and\nofttimes mutually contradictory are the opinions which have been held\nabout Apollonius, for the account of his life which has come down to us\nis in the guise of a romantic story rather than in the form of a plain\nhistory. And this is perhaps to some extent to be expected, for\nApollonius, besides his public teaching, had a life apart, a life into\nwhich even his favourite disciple does not enter. He journeys into the\nmost distant lands, and is lost to the world for years; he enters the\nshrines of the most sacred temples and the inner circles of the most\nexclusive communities, and what he says or does therein remains a\nmystery, or serves only as an opportunity for the weaving of some\nfantastic story by those who did not understand.\n\nThe following study will be simply an attempt to put before the reader a\nbrief sketch of the problem which the records and traditions of the life\nof the famous Tyanean present; but before we deal with the Life of\nApollonius, written by Flavius Philostratus at the beginning of the\nthird century, we must give the reader a brief account of the references\nto Apollonius among the classical writers and the Church Fathers, and a\nshort sketch of the literature of the subject in more recent times, and\nof the varying fortunes of the war of opinion concerning his life in the\nlast four centuries.\n\nFirst, then, with regard to the references in classical and patristic\nauthors. Lucian, the witty writer of the first half of the second\ncentury, makes the subject of one of his satires the pupil of a disciple\nof Apollonius, of one of those who were acquainted with \"all the\ntragedy\"[3] of his life. And Appuleius, a contemporary of Lucian,\nclasses Apollonius with Moses and Zoroaster, and other famous Magi of\nantiquity.[4]\n\nAbout the same period, in a work entitled Qu\u00e6stiones et Responsiones ad\nOrthodoxos, formerly attributed to Justin Martyr, who flourished in the\nsecond quarter of the second century, we find the following interesting\nstatement:\n\n\"Question 24: If God is the maker and master of creation, how do the\nconsecrated objects[5] of Apollonius have power in the [various] orders\nof that creation? For, _as we see_, they check the fury of the waves and\nthe power of the winds and the inroads of vermin and attacks of wild\nbeasts.\"[6]\n\nDion Cassius in his history,[7] which he wrote A.D. 211-222, states that\nCaracalla (Emp. 211-216) honoured the memory of Apollonius with a chapel\nor monument (_heroum_).\n\nIt was just at this time (216) that Philostratus composed his Life of\nApollonius, at the request of Domna Julia, Caracalla's mother, and it is\nwith this document principally that we shall have to deal in the sequel.\n\nLampridius, who flourished about the middle of the third century,\nfurther informs us that Alexander Severus (Emp. 222-235) placed the\nstatue of Apollonius in his _lararium_ together with those of Christ,\nAbraham, and Orpheus.[8]\n\nVopiscus, writing in the last decade of the third century, tells us that\nAurelian (Emp. 270-275) vowed a temple to Apollonius, of whom he had\nseen a vision when besieging Tyana. Vopiscus speaks of the Tyanean as \"a\nsage of the most wide-spread renown and authority, an ancient\nphilosopher, and a true friend of the Gods,\" nay, as a manifestation of\ndeity. \"For what among men,\" exclaims the historian, \"was more holy,\nwhat more worthy of reverence, what more venerable, what more god-like\nthan he? He, it was, who gave life to the dead. He, it was, who did and\nsaid so many things beyond the power of men.\"[9] So enthusiastic is\nVopiscus about Apollonius, that he promises, if he lives, to write a\nshort account of his life in Latin, so that his deeds and words may be\non the tongue of all, for as yet the only accounts are in Greek.[10]\nVopiscus, however, did not fulfil his promise, but we learn that about\nthis date both Soterichus[11] and Nichomachus wrote Lives of our\nphilosopher, and shortly afterwards Tascius Victorianus, working on the\npapers of Nichomachus,[12] also composed a Life. None of these Lives,\nhowever, have reached us.\n\nIt was just at this period also, namely, in the last years of the third\ncentury and the first years of the fourth, that Porphyry and Iamblichus\ncomposed their treatises on Pythagoras and his school; both mention\nApollonius as one of their authorities, and it is probable that the\nfirst 30 sections of Iamblichus are taken from Apollonius.[13]\n\nWe now come to an incident which hurled the character of Apollonius into\nthe arena of Christian polemics, where it has been tossed about until\nthe present day. Hierocles, successively governor of Palmyra, Bithynia,\nand Alexandria, and a philosopher, about the year 305 wrote a criticism\non the claims of the Christians, in two books, called A Truthful\nAddress to the Christians, or more shortly The Truth-lover. He seems to\nhave based himself for the most part on the previous works of Celsus and\nPorphyry,[14] but introduced a new subject of controversy by opposing\nthe wonderful works of Apollonius to the claims of the Christians to\nexclusive right in \"miracles\" as proof of the divinity of their Master.\nIn this part of his treatise Hierocles used Philostratus' Life of\nApollonius.\n\nTo this pertinent criticism of Hierocles Eusebius of C\u00e6sarea immediately\nreplied in a treatise still extant, entitled Contra Hieroclem.[15]\nEusebius admits that Apollonius was a wise and virtuous man, but denies\nthat there is sufficient proof that the wonderful things ascribed to him\never took place; and even if they did take place, they were the work of\n\"d\u00e6mons,\" and not of God. The treatise of Eusebius is interesting; he\nseverely scrutinises the statements in Philostratus, and shows himself\npossessed of a first rate critical faculty. Had he only used the same\nfaculty on the documents of the Church, of which he was the first\nhistorian, posterity would have owed him an eternal debt of gratitude.\nBut Eusebius, like so many other apologists, could only see one side;\njustice, when anything touching Christianity was called into question,\nwas a stranger to his mind, and he would have considered it blasphemy to\nuse his critical faculty on the documents which relate the \"miracles\" of\nJesus. Still the problem of \"miracle\" was the same, as Hierocles pointed\nout, and remains the same to this day.\n\nAfter the controversy reincarnated again in the sixteenth century, and\nwhen the hypothesis of the \"Devil\" as the prime-mover in all \"miracles\"\nbut those of the Church lost its hold with the progress of scientific\nthought, the nature of the wonders related in the Life of Apollonius was\nstill so great a difficulty that it gave rise to a new hypothesis of\nplagiarism. The life of Apollonius was a Pagan plagiarism of the life of\nJesus. But Eusebius and the Fathers who followed him had no suspicion of\nthis; they lived in times when such an assertion could have been easily\nrefuted. There is not a word in Philostratus to show he had any\nacquaintance with the life of Jesus, and fascinating as Baur's\n\"tendency-writing\" theory is to many, we can only say that as a\nplagiarist of the Gospel story Philostratus is a conspicuous failure.\nPhilostratus writes the history of a good and wise man, a man with a\nmission of teaching, clothed in the wonder stories preserved in the\nmemory and embellished by the imagination of fond posterity, but not the\ndrama of incarnate Deity as the fulfilment of world-prophecy.\n\nLactantius, writing about 315, also attacked the treatise of Hierocles,\nwho seems to have put forward some very pertinent criticisms; for the\nChurch Father says that he enumerates so many of their Christian inner\nteachings (_intima_) that sometimes he would seem to have at one time\nundergone the same training (_disciplina_). But it is in vain, says\nLactantius, that Hierocles endeavours to show that Apollonius performed\nsimilar or even greater deeds than Jesus, for Christians do not believe\nthat Christ is God because he did wonderful things, but because all the\nthings wrought in him were those which were announced by the\nprophets.[16] And in taking this ground Lactantius saw far more clearly\nthan Eusebius the weakness of the proof from \"miracle.\"\n\nArnobius, the teacher of Lactantius, however, writing at the end of the\nthird century, before the controversy, in referring to Apollonius\nsimply classes him among Magi, such as Zoroaster and others mentioned in\nthe passage of Appuleius to which we have already referred.[17]\n\nBut even after the controversy there is a wide difference of opinion\namong the Fathers, for although at the end of the fourth century John\nChrysostom with great bitterness calls Apollonius a deceiver and\nevil-doer, and declares that the whole of the incidents in his life are\nunqualified fiction,[18] Jerome, on the contrary, at the very same date,\ntakes almost a favourable view, for, after perusing Philostratus, he\nwrites that Apollonius found everywhere something to learn and something\nwhereby he might become a better man.[19] At the beginning of the fifth\ncentury also Augustine, while ridiculing any attempt at comparison\nbetween Apollonius and Jesus, says that the character of the Tyanean was\n\"far superior\" to that ascribed to Jove, in respect of virtue.[20]\n\nAbout the same date also we find Isidorus of Pelusium, who died in 450,\nbluntly denying that there is any truth in the claim made by \"certain,\"\nwhom he does not further specify, that Apollonius of Tyana \"consecrated\nmany spots in many parts of the world for the safety of the\ninhabitants.\"[21] It is instructive to compare the denial of Isidorus\nwith the passage we have already quoted from Pseudo-Justin. The writer\nof Questions and Answers to the Orthodox in the second century could not\ndispose of the question by a blunt denial; he had to admit it and argue\nthe case on other grounds--namely, the agency of the Devil. Nor can the\nargument of the Fathers, that Apollonius used magic to bring about his\nresults, while the untaught Christians could perform healing wonders by\na single word,[22] be accepted as valid by the unprejudiced critic, for\nthere is no evidence to support the contention that Apollonius employed\nsuch methods for his wonder-workings; on the contrary, both Apollonius\nhimself and his biographer Philostratus strenuously repudiate the charge\nof magic brought against him.\n\nOn the other hand, a few years later, Sidonius Apollinaris, Bishop of\nClaremont, speaks in the highest terms of Apollonius. Sidonius\ntranslated the Life of Apollonius into Latin for Leon, the councillor of\nKing Euric, and in writing to his friend he says: \"Read the life of a\nman who (religion apart) resembles you in many things; a man sought out\nby the rich, yet who never sought for riches; who loved wisdom and\ndespised gold; a man frugal in the midst of feastings, clad in linen in\nthe midst of those clothed in purple, austere in the midst of luxury....\nIn fine, to speak plainly, perchance no historian will find in ancient\ntimes a philosopher whose life is equal to that of Apollonius.\"[23]\n\nThus we see that even among the Church Fathers opinions were divided;\nwhile among the philosophers themselves the praise of Apollonius was\nunstinted.\n\nFor Ammianus Marcellinus, \"the last subject of Rome who composed a\nprofane history in the Latin language,\" and the friend of Julian the\nphilosopher-emperor, refers to the Tyanean as \"that most renowned\nphilosopher\";[24] while a few years later Eunapius, the pupil of\nChrysanthius, one of the teachers of Julian, writing in the last years\nof the fourth century, says that Apollonius was more than a\nphilosopher; he was \"a middle term, as it were, between gods and\nmen.\"[25] Not only was Apollonius an adherent of the Pythagorean\nphilosophy, but \"he fully exemplified the more divine and practical side\nin it.\" In fact Philostratus should have called his biography \"The\nSojourning of a God among Men.\"[26] This seemingly wildly exaggerated\nestimate may perhaps receive explanation in the fact that Eunapius\nbelonged to a school which knew the nature of the attainments ascribed\nto Apollonius.\n\nIndeed, \"as late as the fifth century we find one Volusian, a proconsul\nof Africa, descended from an old Roman family and still strongly\nattached to the religion of his ancestors, almost worshipping Apollonius\nof Tyana as a supernatural being.\"[27]\n\nEven after the downfall of philosophy we find Cassiodorus, who spent\nthe last years of his long life in a monastery, speaking of Apollonius\nas the \"renowned philosopher.\"[28] So also among Byzantine writers, the\nmonk George Syncellus, in the eighth century, refers several times to\nour philosopher, and not only without the slightest adverse criticism,\nbut he declares that he was the first and most remarkable of all the\nillustrious people who appeared under the Empire.[29] Tzetzes also, the\ncritic and grammarian, calls Apollonius \"all-wise and a fore-knower of\nall things.\"[30]\n\nAnd though the monk Xiphilinus, in the eleventh century, in a note to\nhis abridgment of the history of Dion Cassius, calls Apollonius a clever\njuggler and magician,[31] nevertheless Cedrenus in the same century\nbestows on Apollonius the not uncomplimentary title of an \"adept\nPythagorean philosopher,\"[32] and relates several instances of the\nefficacy of his powers in Byzantium. In fact, if we can believe\nNicetas, as late as the thirteenth century there were at Byzantium\ncertain bronze doors, formerly consecrated by Apollonius, which had to\nbe melted down because they had become an object of superstition even\nfor the Christians themselves.[33]\n\nHad the work of Philostratus disappeared with the rest of the Lives, the\nabove would be all that we should have known about Apollonius.[34]\nLittle enough, it is true, concerning so distinguished a character, yet\nample enough to show that, with the exception of theological prejudice,\nthe suffrages of antiquity were all on the side of our philosopher.\n\n\n\n\nSECTION V.\n\nTEXTS, TRANSLATIONS, AND LITERATURE.\n\n\nWe will now turn to the texts, translations, and general literature of\nthe subject in more recent times. Apollonius returned to the memory of\nthe world, after the oblivion of the dark ages, with evil auspices. From\nthe very beginning the old Hierocles-Eusebius controversy was revived,\nand the whole subject was at once taken out of the calm region of\nphilosophy and history and hurled once more into the stormy arena of\nreligious bitterness and prejudice. For long Aldus hesitated to print\nthe text of Philostratus, and only finally did so (in 1501) with the\ntext of Eusebius as an appendix, so that, as he piously phrases it, \"the\nantidote might accompany the poison.\" Together with it appeared a Latin\ntranslation by the Florentine Rinucci.[35]\n\nIn addition to the Latin version the sixteenth century also produced an\nItalian[36] and French translation.[37]\n\nThe _editio princeps_ of Aldus was superseded a century later by the\nedition of Morel,[38] which in its turn was followed a century still\nlater by that of Olearius.[39] Nearly a century and a half later again\nthe text of Olearius was superseded by that of Kayser (the first\ncritical text), whose work in its last edition contains the latest\ncritical apparatus.[40] All information with regard to the MSS. will be\nfound in Kayser's Latin Prefaces.\n\nWe shall now attempt to give some idea of the general literature on the\nsubject, so that the reader may be able to note some of the varying\nfortunes of the war of opinion in the bibliographical indications. And\nif the general reader should be impatient of the matter and eager to get\nto something of greater interest, he can easily omit its perusal; while\nif he be a lover of the mystic way, and does not take delight in\nwrangling controversy, he may at least sympathise with the writer, who\nhas been compelled to look through the works of the last century and a\ngood round dozen of those of the previous centuries, before he could\nventure on an opinion of his own with a clear conscience.\n\nSectarian prejudice against Apollonius characterises nearly every\nopinion prior to the nineteenth century.[41] Of books distinctly\ndedicated to the subject the works of the Abb\u00e9 Dupin[42] and of de\nTillemont[43] are bitter attacks on the Philosopher of Tyana in defence\nof the monopoly of Christian miracles; while those of the Abb\u00e9\nHoutteville[44] and L\u00fcderwald[45] are less violent, though on the same\nlines. A pseudonymous writer, however, of the eighteenth century strikes\nout a somewhat different line by classing together the miracles of the\nJesuits and other Monastic Orders with those of Apollonius, and dubbing\nthem all spurious, while maintaining the sole authenticity of those of\nJesus.[46]\n\nNevertheless, Bacon and Voltaire speak of Apollonius in the highest\nterms,[47] and even a century before the latter the English Deist,\nCharles Blount,[48] raised his voice against the universal obloquy\npoured upon the character of the Tyanean; his work, however, was\nspeedily suppressed.\n\nIn the midst of this war about miracles in the eighteenth century it is\npleasant to remark the short treatise of Herzog, who endeavours to give\na sketch of the philosophy and religious life of Apollonius,[49] but,\nalas! there were no followers of so liberal an example in this century\nof strife.\n\nSo far then for the earlier literature of the subject. Frankly none of\nit is worth reading; the problem could not be calmly considered in such\na period. It started on the false ground of the Hierocles-Eusebius\ncontroversy, which was but an incident (for wonder-working is common to\nall great teachers and not peculiar to Apollonius or Jesus), and was\nembittered by the rise of Encyclop\u00e6dism and the rationalism of the\nRevolution period. Not that the miracle-controversy ceased even in the\nlast century; it does not, however, any longer obscure the whole\nhorizon, and the sun of a calmer judgment may be seen breaking through\nthe mist.\n\nIn order to make the rest of our summary clearer we append at the end of\nthis essay the titles of the works which have appeared since the\nbeginning of the nineteenth century, in chronological order.\n\nA glance over this list will show that the last century has produced an\nEnglish (Berwick's), an Italian (Lancetti's), a French (Chassang's), and\ntwo German translations (Jacobs' and Baltzer's).[50] The Rev. E.\nBerwick's translation is the only English version; in his Preface the\nauthor, while asserting the falsity of the miraculous element in the\nLife, says that the rest of the work deserves careful attention. No harm\nwill accrue to the Christian religion by its perusal, for there are no\nallusions to the Life of Christ in it, and the miracles are based on\nthose ascribed to Pythagoras.\n\nThis is certainly a healthier standpoint than that of the traditional\ntheological controversy, which, unfortunately, however, was revived\nagain by the great authority of Baur, who saw in a number of the early\ndocuments of the Christian era (notably the canonical Acts)\ntendency-writings of but slight historical content, representing the\nchanging fortunes of schools and parties and not the actual histories of\nindividuals. The Life of Apollonius was one of these tendency-writings;\nits object was to put forward a view opposed to Christianity in favour\nof philosophy. Baur thus divorced the whole subject from its historical\nstandpoint and attributed to Philostratus an elaborate scheme of which\nhe was entirely innocent. Baur's view was largely adopted by Zeller in\nhis Philosophie der Griechen (v. 140), and by R\u00e9ville in Holland.\n\nThis \"Christusbild\" theory (carried by a few extremists to the point of\ndenying that Apollonius ever existed) has had a great vogue among\nwriters on the subject, especially compilers of encyclop\u00e6dia articles;\nit is at any rate a wider issue than the traditional miracle-wrangle,\nwhich was again revived in all its ancient narrowness by Newman, who\nonly uses Apollonius as an excuse for a dissertation on orthodox\nmiracles, to which he devotes eighteen pages out of the twenty-five of\nhis treatise. Noack also follows Baur, and to some extent Pettersch,\nthough he takes the subject onto the ground of philosophy; while\nM\u00f6nckeberg, pastor of St. Nicolai in Hamburg, though striving to be fair\nto Apollonius, ends his chatty dissertation with an outburst of orthodox\npraises of Jesus, praises which we by no means grudge, but which are\nentirely out of place in such a subject.\n\nThe development of the Jesus-Apollonius miracle-controversy into the\nJesus-against-Apollonius and even Christ-against-Anti-Christ battle,\nfought out with relays of lusty champions on the one side against a\nfeeble protest at best on the other, is a painful spectacle to\ncontemplate. How sadly must Jesus and Apollonius have looked upon, and\nstill look upon, this bitter and useless strife over their saintly\npersons. Why should posterity set their memories one against the other?\nDid they oppose one another in life? Did even their biographers do so\nafter their deaths? Why then could not the controversy have ceased with\nEusebius? For Lactantius frankly admits the point brought forward by\nHierocles (to exemplify which Hierocles only referred to Apollonius as\none instance out of many)--that \"miracles\" do not prove divinity. We\nrest our claims, says Lactantius, _not_ on miracles, but on the\nfulfilment of prophecy.[51] Had this more sensible position been revived\ninstead of that of Eusebius, the problem of Apollonius would have been\nconsidered in its natural historical environment four hundred years ago,\nand much ink and paper would have been saved.\n\nWith the progress of the critical method, however, opinion has at length\npartly recovered its balance, and it is pleasant to be able to turn to\nworks which have rescued the subject from theological obscurantism and\nplaced it in the open field of historical and critical research. The two\nvolumes of the independent thinker, Legrand d'Aussy, which appeared at\nthe very beginning of the last century, are, for the time, remarkably\nfree from prejudice, and are a praiseworthy attempt at historical\nimpartiality, but criticism was still young at this period. Kayser,\nthough he does not go thoroughly into the matter, decides that the\naccount of Philostratus is purely a \"_fabularis narratio_\" but is well\nopposed by I. M\u00fcller, who contends for a strong element of history as a\nbackground. But by far the best sifting of the sources is that of\nJessen.[52] Priaulx's study deals solely with the Indian episode and is\nof no critical value for the estimation of the sources. Of all previous\nstudies, however, the works of Chassang and Baltzer are the most\ngenerally intelligent, for both writers are aware of the possibilities\nof psychic science, though mostly from the insufficient standpoint of\nspiritistic phenomena.\n\nAs for Tredwell's somewhat pretentious volume which, being in English,\nis accessible to the general reader, it is largely reactionary, and is\nused as a cover for adverse criticism of the Christian origins from a\nSecularist standpoint which denies at the outset the possibility of\n\"miracle\" in any meaning of the word. A mass of well-known\nnumismatological and other matter, which is entirely irrelevant, but\nwhich seems to be new and surprising to the author, is introduced, and a\nmap is prefixed to the title-page purporting to give the itineraries of\nApollonius, but having little reference to the text of Philostratus.\nIndeed, nowhere does Tredwell show that he is working on the text\nitself, and the subject in his hands is but an excuse for a rambling\ndissertation on the first century in general from his own standpoint.\n\nThis is all regrettable, for with the exception of Berwick's\ntranslation, which is almost unprocurable, we have nothing of value in\nEnglish for the general reader,[53] except Sinnett's short sketch,\nwhich is descriptive rather than critical or explanatory.\n\nSo far then for the history of the Apollonius of opinion; we will now\nturn to the Apollonius of Philostratus, and attempt if possible to\ndiscover some traces of the man as he was in history, and the nature of\nhis life and work.\n\n\n\n\nSECTION VI.\n\nTHE BIOGRAPHER OF APOLLONIUS.\n\n\nFlavius Philostratus, the writer of the only Life of Apollonius which\nhas come down to us,[54] was a distinguished man of letters who lived in\nthe last quarter of the second and the first half of the third century\n(_cir._ 175-245 A.D.). He formed one of the circle of famous writers and\nthinkers gathered round the philosopher-empress,[55] Julia Domna, who\nwas the guiding spirit of the Empire during the reigns of her husband\nSeptimius Severus and her son Caracalla. All three members of the\nimperial family were students of occult science, and the age was\npreeminently one in which the occult arts, good and bad, were a passion.\nThus the sceptical Gibbon, in his sketch of Severus and his famous\nconsort, writes:\n\n\"Like most of the Africans, Severus was passionately addicted to the\nvain studies of magic and divination, deeply versed in the\ninterpretation of dreams and omens, and perfectly acquainted with the\nscience of judicial astrology, which in almost every age except the\npresent, has maintained its dominion over the mind of man. He had lost\nhis first wife whilst he was governor of the Lionnese Gaul. In the\nchoice of a second, he sought only to connect himself with some\nfavourite of fortune; and as soon as he had discovered that a young lady\nof Emesa in Syria had _a royal nativity_[56] he solicited and obtained\nher hand. Julia Domna[57] (for that was her name) deserved all that the\nstars could promise her. She possessed, even in an advanced age,[58] the\nattractions of beauty, and united to a lively imagination a firmness of\nmind, and strength of judgment, seldom bestowed on her sex. Her amiable\nqualities never made any deep impression on the dark and jealous temper\nof her husband,[59] but in her son's reign, she administered the\nprincipal affairs of the Empire with a prudence that supported his\nauthority, and with a moderation that sometimes corrected his wild\nextravagances. Julia applied herself to letters and philosophy with some\nsuccess, and with the most splendid reputation. She was the patroness of\nevery art, and the friend of every man of genius.\"[60]\n\nWe thus see, even from Gibbon's somewhat grudging estimate, that Domna\nJulia was a woman of remarkable character, whose outer acts give\nevidence of an inner purpose, and whose private life has not been\nwritten. It was at her request that Philostratus wrote the Life of\nApollonius, and it was she who supplied him with certain MSS. that were\nin her possession, as a basis; for the beautiful daughter of Bassianus,\npriest of the sun at Emesa, was an ardent collector of books from every\npart of the world, especially of the MSS. of philosophers and of\nmemoranda and biographical notes relating to the famous students of the\ninner nature of things.\n\nThat Philostratus was the best man to whom to entrust so important a\ntask, is doubtful. It is true that he was a skilled stylist and a\npractised man of letters, an art critic and an ardent antiquarian, as we\nmay see from his other works; but he was a sophist rather than a\nphilosopher, and though an enthusiastic admirer of Pythagoras and his\nschool, was so from a distance, regarding it rather through a\nwonder-loving atmosphere of curiosity and the embellishments of a lively\nimagination than from a personal acquaintance with its discipline, or a\npractical knowledge of those hidden forces of the soul with which its\nadepts dealt. We have, therefore, to expect a sketch of the appearance\nof a thing by one outside, rather than an exposition of the thing itself\nfrom one within.\n\nThe following is Philostratus' account of the sources from which he\nderived his information concerning Apollonius:[61]\n\n\"I have collected my materials partly from the cities which loved him,\npartly from the temples whose rites and regulations he restored from\ntheir former state of neglect, partly from what others have said about\nhim, and partly from his own letters.[62] More detailed information I\nprocured as follows. Damis was a man of some education who formerly used\nto live in the ancient city of Ninus.[63] He became a disciple of\nApollonius and recorded his travels, in which he says he himself took\npart, and also the views, sayings, and predictions of his master. A\nmember of Damis' family brought the Empress Julia the note-books[64]\ncontaining these memoirs, which up to that time had not been known of.\nAs I was one of the circle of this princess, who was a lover and\npatroness of all literary productions, she ordered me to rewrite these\nsketches and improve their form of expression, for though the Ninevite\nexpressed himself clearly, his style was far from correct. I also have\nhad access to a book by Maximus[65] of \u00c6g\u00e6 which contained all\nApollonius' doings at \u00c6g\u00e6.[66] There is also a will written by\nApollonius, from which we can learn how he almost deified\nphilosophy.[67] As to the four books of Moeragenes[68] on Apollonius they\ndo not deserve attention, for he knows nothing of most of the facts of\nhis life\" (i. 2, 3).\n\nThese are the sources to which Philostratus was indebted for his\ninformation, sources which are unfortunately no longer accessible to us,\nexcept perhaps a few letters. Nor did Philostratus spare any pains to\ngather information on the subject, for in his concluding words (viii.\n31), he tells us that he has himself travelled into most parts of the\n\"world\" and everywhere met with the \"inspired sayings\"[69] of\nApollonius, and that he was especially well acquainted with the temple\ndedicated to the memory of our philosopher at Tyana and founded at the\nimperial expense (\"for the emperors had judged him not unworthy of like\nhonours with themselves\"), whose priests, it is to be presumed, had got\ntogether as much information as they could concerning Apollonius.\n\nA thoroughly critical analysis of the literary effort of Philostratus,\ntherefore, would have to take into account all of these factors, and\nendeavour to assign each statement to its original source. But even then\nthe task of the historian would be incomplete, for it is transparently\nevident that Philostratus has considerably \"embellished\" the narrative\nwith numerous notes and additions of his own and with the composition of\nset speeches.\n\nNow as the ancient writers did not separate their notes from the text,\nor indicate them in any distinct fashion, we have to be constantly on\nour guard to detect the original sources from the glosses of the\nwriter.[70] In fact Philostratus is ever taking advantage of the mention\nof a name or a subject to display his own knowledge, which is often of a\nmost legendary and fantastic nature. This is especially the case in his\ndescription of Apollonius' Indian travels. India at that time and long\nafterwards was considered the \"end of the world,\" and an infinity of the\nstrangest \"travellers' tales\" and mythological fables were in\ncirculation concerning it. One has only to read the accounts of the\nwriters on India[71] from the time of Alexander onwards to discover the\nsource of most of the strange incidents that Philostratus records as\nexperiences of Apollonius. To take but one instance out of a hundred,\nApollonius had to cross the Caucasus, an indefinite name for the great\nsystem of mountain ranges that bound the northern limits of\n[=A]ry[=a]varta. Prometheus was chained to the Caucasus, so every child\nhad been told for centuries. Therefore, if Apollonius crossed the\nCaucasus, he must have seen those chains. And so it was, Philostratus\nassures us (ii. 3). Not only so, but he volunteers the additional\ninformation that you could not tell of what they were made! A perusal of\nMegasthenes, however, will speedily reduce the long Philostratian\naccount of the Indian travels of Apollonius (i. 41-iii. 58) to a very\nnarrow compass, for page after page is simply padding, picked up from\nany one of the numerous Indica to which our widely read author had\naccess.[72] To judge from such writers, Porus[73] (the R[=a]j[=a]h\nconquered by Alexander) was the immemorial king of India. In fact, in\nspeaking of India or any other little-known country, a writer in these\ndays had to drag in all that popular legend associated with it or he\nstood little chance of being listened to. He had to give his narrative\na \"local colour,\" and this was especially the case in a technical\nrhetorical effort like that of Philostratus.\n\nAgain, it was the fashion to insert set speeches and put them in the\nmouths of well-known characters on historical occasions, good instances\nof which may be seen in Thucydides and the Acts of the Apostles.\nPhilostratus repeatedly does this.\n\nBut it would be too long to enter into a detailed investigation of the\nsubject, although the writer has prepared notes on all these points, for\nthat would be to write a volume and not a sketch. Only a few points are\ntherefore set down, to warn the student to be ever on his guard to sift\nout Philostratus from his sources.[74]\n\nBut though we must be keenly alive to the importance of a thoroughly\ncritical attitude where definite facts of history are concerned, we\nshould be as keenly on our guard against judging everything from the\nstandpoint of modern preconceptions. There is but one religious\nliterature of antiquity that has ever been treated with real sympathy in\nthe West, and that is the Jud\u00e6o-Christian; in that alone have men been\ntrained to feel at home, and all in antiquity that treats of religion\nin a different mode to the Jewish or Christian way, is felt to be\nstrange, and, if obscure or extraordinary, to be even repulsive. The\nsayings and doings of the Jewish prophets, of Jesus, and of the\nApostles, are related with reverence, embellished with the greatest\nbeauties of diction, and illumined with the best thought of the age;\nwhile the sayings and doings of other prophets and teachers have been\nfor the most part subjected to the most unsympathetic criticism, in\nwhich no attempt is made to understand their standpoint. Had even-handed\njustice been dealt out all round, the world to-day would have been\nricher in sympathy, in wide-mindedness, in comprehension of nature,\nhumanity, and God, in brief, in soul-experience.\n\nTherefore, in reading the Life of Apollonius let us remember that we\nhave to look at it through the eyes of a Greek, and not through those of\na Jew or a Protestant. The Many in their proper sphere must be for us as\nauthentic a manifestation of the Divine as the One or the All, for\nindeed the \"Gods\" exist in spite of commandment and creed. The Saints\nand Martyrs and Angels have seemingly taken the places of the Heroes and\nD\u00e6mons and Gods, but the change of name and change of view-point among\nmen affect but little the unchangeable facts. To sense the facts of\nuniversal religion under the ever-changing names which men bestow upon\nthem, and then to enter with full sympathy and comprehension into the\nhopes and fears of every phase of the religious mind--to read, as it\nwere, the past lives of our own souls--is a most difficult task. But\nuntil we can put ourselves understandingly in the places of others, we\ncan never see more than one side of the Infinite Life of God. A student\nof comparative religion must not be afraid of terms; he must not shudder\nwhen he meets with \"polytheism,\" or draw back in horror when he\nencounters \"dualism,\" or feel an increased satisfaction when he falls in\nwith \"monotheism\"; he must not feel awe when he pronounces the name of\nYahweh and contempt when he utters the name of Zeus; he must not picture\na satyr when he reads the word \"d\u00e6mon,\" and imagine a winged dream of\nbeauty when he pronounces the word \"angel.\" For him heresy and orthodoxy\nmust not exist; he sees only his own soul slowly working out its own\nexperience, looking at life from every possible view-point, so that\nhaply at last he may see the whole, and having seen the whole, may\nbecome at one with God.\n\nTo Apollonius the mere fashion of a man's faith was unessential; he was\nat home in all lands, among all cults. He had a helpful word for all,\nan intimate knowledge of the particular way of each of them, which\nenabled him to restore them to health. Such men are rare; the records of\nsuch men are precious, and require the embellishments of no rhetorician.\n\nLet us then, first of all, try to recover the outline of the early\nexternal life and of the travels of Apollonius shorn of Philostratus'\nembellishments, and then endeavour to consider the nature of his\nmission, the manner of the philosophy which he so dearly loved and which\nwas to him his religion, and last, if possible, the way of his inner\nlife.\n\n\n\n\nSECTION VII.\n\nEARLY LIFE.\n\n\nApollonius was born[75] at Tyana, a city in the south of Cappadocia,\nsomewhen in the early years of the Christian era. His parents were of\nancient family and considerable fortune (i. 4). At an early age he gave\nsigns of a very powerful memory and studious disposition, and was\nremarkable for his beauty. At the age of fourteen he was sent to Tarsus,\na famous centre of learning of the time, to complete his studies. But\nmere rhetoric and style and the life of the \"schools\" were little suited\nto his serious disposition, and he speedily left for \u00c6g\u00e6, a town on the\nsea-coast east of Tarsus. Here he found surroundings more suitable to\nhis needs, and plunged with ardour into the study of philosophy. He\nbecame intimate with the priests of the temple of \u00c6sculapius, where\ncures were still wrought, and enjoyed the society and instruction of\npupils and teachers of the Platonic, Stoic, Peripatetic, and Epicurean\nschools of philosophy; but though he studied all these systems of\nthought with attention, it was the lessons of the Pythagorean school\nupon which he seized with an extraordinary depth of comprehension,[76]\nand that, too, although his teacher, Euxenus, was but a parrot of the\ndoctrines and not a practiser of the discipline. But such parrotting was\nnot enough for the eager spirit of Apollonius; his extraordinary\n\"memory,\" which infused life into the dull utterances of his tutor,\nurged him on, and at the age of sixteen \"he soared into the Pythagorean\nlife, winged by some greater one.\"[77] Nevertheless he retained his\naffection for the man who had told him of the way, and rewarded him\nhandsomely (i. 7).\n\nWhen Euxenus asked him how he would begin his new mode of life he\nreplied: \"As doctors purge their patients.\" Hence he refused to touch\nanything that had animal life in it, on the ground that it densified the\nmind and rendered it impure. He considered that the only pure form of\nfood was what the earth produced, fruits and vegetables. He also\nabstained from wine, for though it was made from fruit, \"it rendered\nturbid the \u00e6ther[78] in the soul\" and \"destroyed the composure of the\nmind.\" Moreover, he went barefoot, let his hair grow long, and wore\nnothing but linen. He now lived in the temple, to the admiration of the\npriests and with the express approval of \u00c6sculapius,[79] and he rapidly\nbecame so famous for his asceticism and pious life, that a saying[80] of\nthe Cilicians about him became a proverb (i. 8).\n\nAt the age of twenty his father died (his mother having died some years\nbefore) leaving a considerable fortune, which Apollonius was to share\nwith his elder brother, a wild and dissolute youth of twenty-three.\nBeing still a minor, Apollonius continued to reside at \u00c6g\u00e6, where the\ntemple of \u00c6sculapius had now become a busy centre of study, and echoed\nfrom one end to the other with the sound of lofty philosophical\ndiscourses. On coming of age he returned to Tyana to endeavour to rescue\nhis brother from his vicious life. His brother had apparently exhausted\nhis legal share of the property, and Apollonius at once made over half\nof his own portion to him, and by his gentle admonitions restored him\nto his manhood. In fact he seems to have devoted his time to setting in\norder the affairs of the family, for he distributed the rest of his\npatrimony among certain of his relatives, and kept for himself but a\nbare pittance; he required but little, he said, and should never marry\n(i. 13).\n\nHe now took the vow of silence for five years, for he was determined not\nto write on philosophy until he had passed through this wholesome\ndiscipline. These five years were passed mostly in Pamphylia and\nCilicia, and though he spent much time in study, he did not immure\nhimself in a community or monastery but kept moving about and travelling\nfrom city to city. The temptations to break his self-imposed vow were\nenormous. His strange appearance drew everyone's attention, the\nlaughter-loving populace made the silent philosopher the butt of their\nunscrupulous wit, and all the protection he had against their scurrility\nand misconceptions was the dignity of his mien and the glance of eyes\nthat now could see both past and future. Many a time he was on the verge\nof bursting out against some exceptional insult or lying gossip, but\never he restrained himself with the words: \"Heart, patient be, and thou,\nmy tongue, be still\"[81] (i. 14).\n\nYet even this stern repression of the common mode of speech did not\nprevent his good doing. Even at this early age he had begun to correct\nabuses. With eyes and hands and motions of the head, he made his meaning\nunderstood, and on one occasion, at Aspendus in Pamphylia, prevented a\nserious corn riot by silencing the crowd with his commanding gestures\nand then writing what he had to say on his tablets (i. 15).\n\nSo far, apparently, Philostratus has been dependent upon the account of\nMaximus of \u00c6g\u00e6, or perhaps only up to the time of Apollonius' quitting\n\u00c6g\u00e6. There is now a considerable gap in the narrative, and two short\nchapters of vague generalities (i. 16, 17) are all that Philostratus can\nproduce as the record of some fifteen or twenty[82] years, until Damis'\nnotes begin.\n\nAfter the five years of silence, we find Apollonius at Antioch, but this\nseems to be only an incident in a long round of travel and work, and it\nis probable that Philostratus brings Antioch into prominence merely\nbecause what little he had learnt of this period of Apollonius' life, he\npicked up in this much-frequented city.\n\nEven from Philostratus himself we learn incidentally later on (i. 20;\niv. 38) that Apollonius had spent some time among the Arabians, and had\nbeen instructed by them. And by Arabia we are to understand the country\nsouth of Palestine, which was at this period a regular hot-bed of mystic\ncommunities. The spots he visited were in out-of-the-way places, where\nthe spirit of holiness lingered, and not the crowded and disturbed\ncities, for the subject of his conversation, he said, required \"_men_\nand not people.\"[83] He spent his time in travelling from one to another\nof these temples, shrines, and communities; from which we may conclude\nthat there was some kind of a common freemasonry, as it were, among\nthem, of the nature of initiation, which opened the door of hospitality\nto him.\n\nBut wherever he went, he always held to a certain regular division of\nthe day. At sun-rise he practised certain religious exercises alone, the\nnature of which he communicated only to those who had passed through the\ndiscipline of a \"four years'\" (? five years') silence. He then conversed\nwith the temple priests or the heads of the community, according as he\nwas staying in a Greek or non-Greek temple with public rites, or in a\ncommunity with a discipline peculiar to itself apart from the public\ncult.[84]\n\nHe thus endeavoured to bring back the public cults to the purity of\ntheir ancient traditions, and to suggest improvements in the practices\nof the private brotherhoods. The most important part of his work was\nwith those who were following the inner life, and who already looked\nupon Apollonius as a teacher of the hidden way. To these his comrades\n([Greek: hetairous]) and pupils ([Greek: homil\u00eatas]), he devoted much\nattention, being ever ready to answer their questions and give advice\nand instruction. Not however that he neglected the people; it was his\ninvariable custom to teach them, but always after mid-day; for those who\nlived the inner life,[85] he said, should on day's dawning enter the\npresence of the Gods,[86] then spend the time till mid-day in giving and\nreceiving instruction in holy things, and not till after noon devote\nthemselves to human affairs. That is to say, the morning was devoted by\nApollonius to the divine science, and the afternoon to instruction in\nethics and practical life. After the day's work he bathed in cold water,\nas did so many of the mystics of the time in those lands, notably the\nEssenes and Therapeuts (i. 16).\n\n\"After these things,\" says Philostratus, as vaguely as the writer of a\ngospel narrative, Apollonius determined to visit the Brachmanes and\nSarmanes.[87] What induced our philosopher to make so long and dangerous\na journey nowhere appears from Philostratus, who simply says that\nApollonius thought it a good thing for a young man[88] to travel. It is\nabundantly evident, however, that Apollonius never travelled merely for\nthe sake of travelling. What he does he does with a distinct purpose.\nAnd his guides on this occasion, as he assures his disciples who tried\nto dissuade him from his endeavour and refused to accompany him, were\nwisdom and his inner monitor (d\u00e6mon). \"Since ye are faint-hearted,\" says\nthe solitary pilgrim, \"I bid you farewell. As for myself I must go\nwhithersoever wisdom and my inner self may lead me. The Gods are my\nadvisers and I can but rely on their counsels\" (i. 18).\n\n\n\n\nSECTION VIII.\n\nTHE TRAVELS OF APOLLONIUS.\n\n\nAnd so Apollonius departs from Antioch and journeys on to Ninus, the\nrelic of the once great Nina or Nineveh. There he meets with Damis, who\nbecomes his constant companion and faithful disciple. \"Let us go\ntogether,\" says Damis in words reminding us somewhat of the words of\nRuth. \"Thou shalt follow God, and I thee!\" (i. 19).\n\nFrom this point Philostratus professes to base himself to a great extent\non the narrative of Damis, and before going further, it is necessary to\ntry to form some estimate of the character of Damis, and discover how\nfar he was admitted to the real confidence of Apollonius.\n\nDamis was an enthusiast who loved Apollonius with a passionate\naffection. He saw in his master almost a divine being, possessed of\nmarvellous powers at which he continually wondered, but which he could\nnever understand. Like [=A]nanda, the favourite disciple of the Buddha\nand his constant companion, Damis advanced but slowly in comprehension\nof the real nature of spiritual science; he had ever to remain in the\nouter courts of the temples and communities into whose shrines and inner\nconfidence Apollonius had full access, while he frequently states his\nignorance of his master's plans and purposes.[89] The additional fact\nthat he refers to his notes as the \"crumbs\"[90] from the \"feasts of the\nGods\" (i. 19), those feasts of which he could for the most part only\nlearn at secondhand what little Apollonius thought fit to tell him, and\nwhich he doubtless largely misunderstood and clothed in his own\nimaginings, would further confirm this view, if any further confirmation\nwere necessary. But indeed it is very manifest everywhere that Damis was\noutside the circle of initiation, and this accounts both for his\nwonder-loving point of view and his general superficiality.\n\nAnother fact that comes out prominently from the narrative is his timid\nnature.[91] He is continually afraid for himself or for his master; and\neven towards the end, when Apollonius is imprisoned by Domitian, it\nrequires the phenomenal removal of the fetters before his eyes to\nassure him that Apollonius is a willing victim.\n\nDamis loves and wonders; seizes on unimportant detail and exaggerates\nit, while he can only report of the really important things what he\nfancies to have taken place from a few hints of Apollonius. As his story\nadvances, it is true it takes on a soberer tint; but what Damis omits,\nPhilostratus is ever ready to supply from his own store of marvels, if\nchance offers.\n\nNevertheless, even were we with the scalpel of criticism to cut away\nevery morsel of flesh from this body of tradition and legend, there\nwould still remain a skeleton of fact that would still represent\nApollonius and give us some idea of his stature.\n\nApollonius was one of the greatest travellers known to antiquity. Among\nthe countries and places he visited the following are the chief ones\nrecorded by Philostratus.[92]\n\nFrom Ninus (i. 19) Apollonius journeys to Babylon (i. 21), where he\nstops one year and eight months (i. 40) and visits surrounding cities\nsuch as Ecbatana, the capital of Media (i. 39); from Babylon to the\nIndian frontier no names are mentioned; India was entered in every\nprobability by the Khaibar Pass (ii. 6),[93] for the first city\nmentioned is Taxila (Attock) (ii. 20); and so they make their way across\nthe tributaries of the Indus (ii. 43) to the valley of the Ganges (iii.\n5), and finally arrive at the \"monastery of the wise men\" (iii. 10),\nwhere Apollonius spends four months (iii. 50).\n\nThis monastery was presumably in Nep[=a]l; it is in the mountains, and\nthe \"city\" nearest it is called Paraca. The chaos that Philostratus has\nmade of Damis' account, and before him the wonderful transformations\nDamis himself wrought in Indian names, are presumably shown in this\nword. Paraca is perchance all that Damis could make of Bharata, the\ngeneral name of the Ganges valley in which the dominant [=A]ryas were\nsettled. It is also probable that these wise men were Buddhists, for\nthey dwelt in a [Greek: tyrsis], a place that looked like a fort or\nfortress to Damis.\n\nI have little doubt that Philostratus could make nothing out of the\ngeography of India from the names in Damis' diary; they were all\nunfamiliar to him, so that as soon as he has exhausted the few Greek\nnames known to him from the accounts of the expedition of Alexander, he\nwanders in the \"ends of the earth,\" and can make nothing of it till he\npicks up our travellers again on their return journey at the mouth of\nthe Indus. The salient fact that Apollonius was making for a certain\ncommunity, which was his peculiar goal, so impressed the imagination of\nPhilostratus (and perhaps of Damis before him) that he has described it\nas being the only centre of the kind in India. Apollonius went to India\nwith a purpose and returned from it with a distinct mission;[94] and\nperchance his constant inquiries concerning the particular \"wise men\"\nwhom he was seeking, led Damis to imagine that they alone were the\n\"Gymnosophists,\" the \"naked philosophers\" (if we are to take the term in\nits literal sense) of popular Greek legend, which ignorantly ascribed to\nall the Hindu ascetics the most striking peculiarity of a very small\nnumber. But to return to our itinerary.\n\nPhilostratus embellishes the account of the voyage from the Indus to the\nmouth of the Euphrates (iii. 52-58) with the travellers' tales and\nnames of islands and cities he has gleaned from the Indica which were\naccessible to him, and so we again return to Babylon and familiar\ngeography with the following itinerary:\n\nBabylon, Ninus, Antioch, Seleucia, Cyprus; thence to Ionia (iii. 58),\nwhere he spends some time in Asia Minor, especially at Ephesus (iv. 1),\nSmyrna (iv. 5), Pergamus (iv. 9), and Troy (iv. 11). Thence Apollonius\ncrosses over to Lesbos (iv. 13), and subsequently sails for Athens,\nwhere he spends some years in Greece (iv. 17-33) visiting the temples of\nHellas, reforming their rites and instructing the priests (iv. 24). We\nnext find him in Crete (iv. 34), and subsequently at Rome in the time of\nNero (iv. 36-46).\n\nIn A.D. 66 Nero issued a decree forbidding any philosopher to remain in\nRome, and Apollonius set out for Spain, and landed at Gades, the modern\nCadiz; he seems to have stayed in Spain only a short time (iv. 47);\nthence crossed to Africa, and so by sea once more to Sicily, where the\nprincipal cities and temples were visited (v. 11-14). Thence Apollonius\nreturned to Greece (v. 18), four years having elapsed since his landing\nat Athens from Lesbos (v. 19).[95]\n\nFrom Pir\u00e6us our philosopher sails for Chios (v. 21), thence to Rhodes,\nand so to Alexandria (v. 24). At Alexandria he spends some time, and has\nseveral interviews with the future Emperor Vespasian (v. 27-41), and\nthence he sets out on a long journey up the Nile as far as Ethiopia\nbeyond the cataracts, where he visits an interesting community of\nascetics called loosely Gymnosophists (vi. 1-27).\n\nOn his return to Alexandria (vi. 28), he was summoned by Titus, who had\njust become emperor, to meet him at Tarsus (vi. 29-34). After this\ninterview he appears to have returned to Egypt, for Philostratus speaks\nvaguely of his spending some time in Lower Egypt, and of visits to the\nPhoenicians, Cilicians, Ionians, Ach\u00e6ans, and also to Italy (vi. 35).\n\nNow Vespasian was emperor from 69 to 79, and Titus from 79 to 81. As\nApollonius' interviews with Vespasian took place shortly before the\nbeginning of that emperor's reign, it is reasonable to conclude that a\nnumber of years was spent by our philosopher in his Ethiopian journey,\nand that therefore Damis' account is a most imperfect one. In 81\nDomitian became emperor, and just as Apollonius opposed the follies of\nNero, so did he criticise the acts of Domitian. He accordingly became an\nobject of suspicion to the emperor; but instead of keeping away from\nRome, he determined to brave the tyrant to his face. Crossing from Egypt\nto Greece and taking ship at Corinth, he sailed by way of Sicily to\nPuteoli, and thence to the Tiber mouth, and so to Rome (vii. 10-16).\nHere Apollonius was tried and acquitted (vii. 17--viii. 10). Sailing\nfrom Puteoli again Apollonius returned to Greece (viii. 15), where he\nspent two years (viii. 24). Thence once more he crossed over to Ionia at\nthe time of the death of Domitian (viii. 25), visiting Smyrna and\nEphesus and other of his favourite haunts. Hereupon he sends away Damis\non some pretext to Rome (viii. 28) and--disappears; that is to say, if\nit be allowed to speculate, he undertook yet another journey to the\nplace which he loved above all others, the \"home of the wise men.\"\n\nNow Domitian was killed 96 A.D., and one of the last recorded acts of\nApollonius is his vision of this event at the time of its occurrence.\nTherefore the trial of Apollonius at Rome took place somewhere about 93,\nand we have a gap of twelve years from his interview with Titus in 81,\nwhich Philostratus can only fill up with a few vague stories and\ngeneralities.\n\nAs to his age at the time of his mysterious disappearance from the\npages of history, Philostratus tells us that Damis says nothing; but\nsome, he adds, say he was eighty, some ninety, and some even an hundred.\n\nThe estimate of eighty years seems to fit in best with the rest of the\nchronological indications, but there is no certainty in the matter with\nthe present materials at our disposal.\n\nSuch then is the geographical outline, so to say, of the life of\nApollonius, and even the most careless reader of the bare skeleton of\nthe journeys recorded by Philostratus must be struck by the indomitable\nenergy of the man, and his power of endurance.\n\nWe will now turn our attention to one or two points of interest\nconnected with the temples and communities he visited.\n\n\n\n\nSECTION IX.\n\nIN THE SHRINES OF THE TEMPLES AND THE RETREATS OF RELIGION.\n\n\nSeeing that the nature of Apollonius' business with the priests of the\ntemples and the devotees of the mystic life was necessarily of a most\nintimate and secret nature, for in those days it was the invariable\ncustom to draw a sharp line of demarcation between the inner and outer,\nthe initiated and the profane, it is not to be expected that we can\nlearn anything but mere externalities from the Damis-Philostratus\nnarrative; nevertheless, even these outer indications are of interest.\n\nThe temple of \u00c6sculapius at \u00c6g\u00e6, where Apollonius spent the most\nimpressionable years of his life, was one of the innumerable hospitals\nof Greece, where the healing art was practised on lines totally\ndifferent to our present methods. We are at once introduced to an\natmosphere laden with psychic influences, to a centre whither for\ncenturies patients had flocked to \"consult the God.\" In order to do so,\nit was necessary for them to go through certain preliminary\npurifications and follow certain rules given by the priests; they then\npassed the night in the shrine and in their sleep instructions were\ngiven them for their healing. This method, no doubt, was only resorted\nto when the skill of the priest was exhausted; in any case, the priests\nmust have been deeply versed in the interpretation of these dreams and\nin their rationale. It is also evident that as Apollonius loved to pass\nhis time in the temple, he must have found there satisfaction for his\nspiritual needs, and instruction in the inner science; though doubtless\nhis own innate powers soon carried him beyond his instructors and marked\nhim out as the \"favourite of the God.\" The many cases on record in our\nown day of patients in trance or some other psychic condition\nprescribing for themselves, will help the student to understand the\ninnumerable possibilities of healing which were in Greece summed up in\nthe personification \u00c6sculapius.\n\nLater on the chief of the Indian sages has a disquisition on \u00c6sculapius\nand the healing art put into his mouth (iii. 44), where the whole of\nmedicine is said to be dependent upon psychic diagnosis and prescience\n([Greek: manteia]).\n\nFinally it may be noticed that it was the invariable custom of patients\non their recovery to record the fact on an _ex-voto_ tablet in the\ntemple, precisely as is done to-day in Roman Catholic countries.[96]\n\nOn his way to India Apollonius saw a good deal of the Magi at Babylon.\nHe used to visit them at mid-day and mid-night, but of what transpired\nDamis knew nothing, for Apollonius would not permit him to accompany\nhim, and in answer to his direct questions would only answer: \"They are\nwise, but not in all things\" (i. 26).\n\nThe description of a certain hall, however, to which Apollonius had\naccess, seems to be a garbled version of the interior of the temple. The\nroof was dome-shaped, and the ceiling was covered with \"sapphire\"; in\nthis blue heaven were models of the heavenly bodies (\"those whom they\nregard as Gods\") fashioned in gold, as though moving in the ether.\nMoreover from the roof were suspended four golden \"Iygges\" which the\nMagi call the \"Tongues of the Gods.\" These were winged-wheels or spheres\nconnected with the idea of Adrasteia (or Fate). Their prototypes are\ndescribed imperfectly in the Vision of Ezekiel, and the so-called\nHecatine _strophali_ or _spherul\u00e6_ used in magical practices may have\nbeen degenerate descendants of these \"living wheels\" or spheres of the\nvital elements. The subject is one of intense interest, but hopelessly\nincapable of treatment in our present age of scepticism and profound\nignorance of the past. The \"Gods\" who taught our infant humanity were,\naccording to occult tradition, from a humanity higher than that at\npresent evolving on our earth. They gave the impulse, and, when the\nearth-children were old enough to stand on their own feet, they\nwithdrew. But the memory of their deeds and a corrupt and degenerate\nform of the mysteries they established has ever lingered in the memory\nof myth and legend. Seers have caught obscure glimpses of what they\ntaught and how they taught it, and the tradition of the Mysteries\npreserved some memory of it in its symbols and instruments or engines.\nThe Iygges of the Magi are said to be a relic of this memory.\n\nWith regard to the Indian sages it is impossible to make out any\nconsistent story from the fantastic jumble of the Damis-Philostratus\nromance. Damis seems to have confused together a mixture of memories and\nscraps of gossip without any attempt to distinguish one community or\nsect from another, and so produced a blurred daub which Philostratus\nwould have us regard as a picture of the \"hill\" and a description of\nits \"sages.\" Damis' confused memories,[97] however, have little to do\nwith the actual monastery and its ascetic inhabitants, who were the goal\nof Apollonius' long journey. What Apollonius heard and saw there,\nfollowing his invariable custom in such circumstances, he told no one,\nnot even Damis, except what could be derived from the following\nenigmatical sentence: \"I saw men dwelling on the earth and yet not on\nit, defended on all sides, yet without any defence, and yet possessed of\nnothing but what all possess.\" These words occur in two passages (iii.\n15 and vi. 11), and in both Philostratus adds that Apollonius wrote[98]\nand spoke them enigmatically. The meaning of this saying is not\ndifficult to divine. They were on the earth, but not of the earth, for\ntheir minds were set on things above. They were protected by their\ninnate spiritual power, of which we have so many instances in Indian\nliterature; and yet they possessed nothing but what all men possess if\nthey would but develop the spiritual part of their being. But this\nexplanation is not simple enough for Philostratus, and so he presses\ninto service all the memories of Damis, or rather travellers' tales,\nabout levitation, magical illusions and the rest.\n\nThe head of the community is called Iarchas, a totally un-Indian name.\nThe violence done to all foreign names by the Greeks is notorious, and\nhere we have to reckon with an army of ignorant copyists as well as with\nPhilostratus and Damis. I would suggest that the name may perhaps be a\ncorruption of Arhat.[99]\n\nThe main burden of Damis' narrative insists on the psychic and spiritual\nknowledge of the sages. They know what takes place at a distance, they\ncan tell the past and future, and read the past births of men.\n\nThe messenger sent to meet Apollonius carried what Damis calls a golden\nanchor (iii. 11, 17), and if this is an authentic fact, it would suggest\na forerunner of the Tibetan _dorje_, the present degenerate symbol of\nthe \"rod of power,\" something like the thunder-bolt wielded by Zeus.\nThis would also point to a Buddhist community, though it must be\nconfessed that other indications point equally strongly to\nBr[=a]hmanical customs, such as the caste-mark on the forehead of the\nmessenger (iii. 7, 11), the carrying of (bamboo) staves (da[n.][d.]a),\nletting the hair grow long, and wearing of turbans (iii. 13). But indeed\nthe whole account is too confused to permit any hope of extracting\nhistorical details.\n\nOf the nature of Apollonius' visit we may, however, judge from the\nfollowing mysterious letter to his hosts (iii. 51):\n\n\"I came to you by land and ye have given me the sea; nay, rather, by\nsharing with me your wisdom ye have given me power to travel through\nheaven. These things will I bring back to the mind of the Greeks, and I\nwill hold converse with you as though ye were present, if it be that I\nhave not drunk of the cup of Tantalus in vain.\"\n\nIt is evident from these cryptic sentences that the \"sea\" and the \"cup\nof Tantalus\" are identical with the \"wisdom\" which had been imparted to\nApollonius--the wisdom which he was to bring back once more to the\nmemory of the Greeks. He thus clearly states that he returned from India\nwith a distinct mission and with the means to accomplish it, for not\nonly had he drunk of the ocean of wisdom in that he has learnt the\nBrahm[=a]-vidy[=a] from their lips, but he has also learnt how to\nconverse with them though his body be in Greece and their bodies in\nIndia.\n\nBut such a plain meaning--plain at least to every student of occult\nnature--was beyond the understanding of Damis or the comprehension of\nPhilostratus. And it is doubtless the mention of the \"cup of\nTantalus\"[100] in this letter which suggested the inexhaustible loving\ncup episode in iii. 32, and its connection with the mythical fountains\nof Bacchus. Damis presses it into service to \"explain\" the last phrase\nin Apollonius' saying about the sages, namely, that they were \"possessed\nof nothing but what all possess\"--which, however, appears elsewhere in a\nchanged form, as \"possessing nothing, they have the possessions of all\nmen\" (iii. 15).[101]\n\nOn returning to Greece, one of the first shrines Apollonius visited was\nthat of Aphrodite at Paphos in Cyprus (iii. 58). The greatest external\npeculiarity of the Paphian worship of Venus was the representation of\nthe goddess by a mysterious stone symbol. It seems to have been of the\nsize of a human being, but shaped like a pine-cone, only of course with\na smooth surface. Paphos was apparently the oldest shrine dedicated to\nVenus in Greece. Its mysteries were very ancient, but not indigenous;\nthey were brought over from the mainland, from what was subsequently\nCilicia, in times of remote antiquity.\n\nThe worship or consultation of the Goddess was by means of prayers and\nthe \"pure flame of fire,\" and the temple was a great centre of\ndivination.[102]\n\nApollonius spent some time here and instructed the priests at length\nwith regard to their sacred rites.\n\nIn Asia Minor he was especially pleased with the temple of \u00c6sculapius at\nPergamus; he healed many of the patients there, and gave instruction in\nthe proper methods to adopt in order to procure reliable results by\nmeans of the prescriptive dreams.\n\nAt Troy, we are told, Apollonius spent a night alone at the tomb of\nAchilles, in former days one of the spots of greatest popular sanctity\nin Greece (iv. 11). Why he did so does not transpire, for the fantastic\nconversation with the shade of the hero reported by Philostratus (iv.\n16) seems to be devoid of any element of likelihood. As, however,\nApollonius made it his business to visit Thessaly shortly afterwards\nexpressly to urge the Thessalians to renew the old accustomed rites to\nthe hero (iv. 13), we may suppose that it formed part of his great\neffort to restore and purify the old institutions of Hellas, so that,\nthe accustomed channels being freed, the life might flow more healthily\nin the national body.\n\nRumour would also have it that Achilles had told Apollonius where he\nwould find the statue of the hero Palamedes on the coast of \u00c6olia.\nApollonius accordingly restored the statue, and Philostratus tells us he\nhad seen it with his own eyes on the spot (iv. 13).\n\nNow this would be a matter of very little interest, were it not that a\ngreat deal is made of Palamedes elsewhere in Philostratus' narrative.\nWhat it all means is difficult to say with a Damis and Philostratus as\ninterpreters between ourselves and the silent and enigmatical\nApollonius.\n\nPalamedes was one of the heroes before Troy, who was fabled to have\ninvented letters, or to have completed the alphabet of Cadmus.[103]\n\nNow from two obscure sayings (iv. 13, 33), we glean that our philosopher\nlooked upon Palamedes as the philosopher-hero of the Trojan period,\nalthough Homer says hardly a word about him.\n\nWas this, then, the reason why Apollonius was so anxious to restore his\nstatue? Not altogether so; there appears to have been a more direct\nreason. Damis would have it that Apollonius had met Palamedes in India;\nthat he was at the monastery; that Iarchas had one day pointed out a\nyoung ascetic who could \"write without ever learning letters\"; and that\nthis youth had been no other than Palamedes in one of his former\nbirths. Doubtless the sceptic will say: \"Of course! Pythagoras was a\nreincarnation of the hero Euphorbus who fought at Troy, according to\npopular superstition; therefore, naturally, the young Indian was the\nreincarnation of the hero Palamedes! The one legend simply begat the\nother.\" But on this principle, to be consistent, we should expect to\nfind that it was Apollonius himself and not an unknown Hindu ascetic,\nwho had been once Palamedes.\n\nIn any case Apollonius restored the rites to Achilles, and erected a\nchapel in which he set up the neglected statue of Palamedes.[104] The\nheroes of the Trojan period, then, it would seem, had still some\nconnection with Greece, according to the science of the invisible world\ninto which Apollonius was initiated. And if the Protestant sceptic can\nmake nothing of it, at least the Roman Catholic reader may be induced to\nsuspend his judgment by changing \"hero\" into \"saint.\"\n\nCan it be possible that the attention which Apollonius bestowed upon the\ngraves and funeral monuments of the mighty dead of Greece may have been\ninspired by the circle of ideas which led to the erection of the\ninnumerable d[=a]gobas and st[=u]pas in Buddhist lands, originally over\nthe relics of the Buddha, and the subsequent preservation of relics of\narhats and great teachers?\n\nAt Lesbos Apollonius visited the ancient temple of the Orphic mysteries,\nwhich in early years had been a great centre of prophecy and divination.\nHere also he was privileged to enter the inner shrine or adytum (iv.\n14).\n\nThe Tyanean arrived in Athens at the time of the Eleusinian Mysteries,\nand in spite of the festival and rites not only the people but also the\ncandidates flocked to meet him to the neglect of their religious duties.\nApollonius rebuked them, and himself joined in the necessary preliminary\nrites and presented himself for initiation.\n\nIt may, perhaps, surprise the reader to hear that Apollonius, who had\nalready been initiated into higher privileges than Eleusis could afford,\nshould present himself for initiation. But the reason is not far to\nseek; the Eleusinia constituted one of the intermediate organisations\nbetween the popular cults and the genuine inner circles of instruction.\nThey preserved one of the traditions of the inner way, even if their\nofficers for the time being had forgotten what their predecessors had\nonce known. To restore these ancient rites to their purity, or to\nutilise them for their original object, it was necessary to enter within\nthe precincts of the institution; nothing could be effected from\noutside. The thing itself was good, and Apollonius desired to support\nthe ancient institution by setting the public example of seeking\ninitiation therein; not that he had anything to gain personally.\n\nBut whether it was that the hierophant of that time was only ignorant,\nor whether he was jealous of the great influence of Apollonius, he\nrefused to admit our philosopher, on the ground that he was a sorcerer\n([Greek: go\u00eas]), and that no one could be initiated who was tainted by\nintercourse with evil entities ([Greek: daimonia]). To this charge\nApollonius replied with veiled irony: \"You have omitted the most serious\ncharge that might have been urged against me: to wit, that though I\nreally know more about the mystic rite than its hierophant, I have come\nhere pretending to desire initiation from men knowing more than myself.\"\nThis charge would have been true; he had made a pretence.\n\nDismayed at these words, frightened at the indignation of the people\naroused by the insult offered to their distinguished guest, and overawed\nby the presence of a knowledge which he could no longer deny, the\nhierophant begged our philosopher to accept the initiation. But\nApollonius refused. \"I will be initiated later on,\" he replied; \"_he_\nwill initiate me.\" This is said to have referred to the succeeding\nhierophant, who presided when Apollonius was initiated four years later\n(iv. 18; v. 19).\n\nWhile at Athens Apollonius spoke strongly against the effeminacy of the\nBacchanalia and the barbarities of the gladiatorial combats (iv. 21,\n22).\n\nThe temples, mentioned by Philostratus, which Apollonius visited in\nGreece, have all the peculiarity of being very ancient; for instance,\nDodona, Delphi, the ancient shrine of Apollo at Ab\u00e6 in Phocis, the\n\"caves\" of Amphiaraus[105] and Trophonius, and the temple of the Muses\non Helicon.\n\nWhen he entered the adyta of these temples for the purpose of\n\"restoring\" the rites, he was accompanied only by the priests, and\ncertain of his immediate disciples ([Greek: gn\u00f4rimoi]). This suggests an\nextension to the meaning of the word \"restoring\" or \"reforming,\" and\nwhen we read elsewhere of the many spots consecrated by Apollonius, we\ncannot but think that part of his work was the reconsecration, and hence\npsychic purification, of many of these ancient centres. His main\nexternal work, however, was the giving of instruction, and, as\nPhilostratus rhetorically phrases it, \"bowls of his words were set up\neverywhere for the thirsty to drink from\" (iv. 24).\n\nBut not only did our philosopher restore the ancient rites of religion,\nhe also paid much attention to the ancient polities and institutions.\nThus we find him urging with success the Spartans to return to their\nancient mode of life, their athletic exercises, frugal living, and the\ndiscipline of the old Dorian tradition (iv. 27, 31-34); he, moreover,\nspecially praised the institution of the Olympic Games, the high\nstandard of which was still maintained (iv. 29), while he recalled the\nancient Amphictionic Council to its duty (iv. 23), and corrected the\nabuses of the Panionian assembly (iv. 5).\n\nIn the spring of 66 A.D. he left Greece for Crete, where he seems to\nhave bestowed most of his time on the sanctuaries of Mount Ida and the\ntemple of \u00c6sculapius at Lebene (\"for as all Asia visits Pergamus so does\nall Crete visit Lebene\"); but curiously enough he refused to visit the\nfamous Labyrinth at Gnossus, the ruins of which have just been uncovered\nfor a sceptical generation, most probably (if it is lawful to speculate)\nbecause it had once been a centre of human sacrifice, and thus pertained\nto one of the ancient cults of the left hand.\n\nIn Rome Apollonius continued his work of reforming the temples, and this\nwith the full sanction of the Pontifex Maximus Telesinus, one of the\nconsuls for the year 66 A.D., who was also a philosopher and a deep\nstudent of religion (iv. 40). But his stay in the imperial city was\nspeedily cut short, for in October Nero crowned his persecution of the\nphilosophers by publishing a decree of banishment against them from\nRome, and both Telesinus (vii. 11) and Apollonius had to leave Italy.\n\nWe next find him in Spain, making his headquarters in the temple of\nHercules at Cadiz.\n\nOn his return to Greece by way of Africa and Sicily (where he spent some\ntime and visited \u00c6tna), he passed the winter (? of 67 A.D.) at Eleusis,\nliving in the temple, and in the spring of the following year sailed for\nAlexandria, spending some time on the way at Rhodes. The city of\nphilosophy and eclecticism _par excellence_ received him with open arms\nas an old friend. But to reform the public cults of Egypt was a far more\ndifficult task than any he had previously attempted. His presence in the\ntemple (? the temple of Serapis) commanded universal respect, everything\nabout him and every word he uttered seemed to breathe an atmosphere of\nwisdom and of \"something divine.\" The high priest of the temple looked\non in proud disdain. \"Who is wise enough,\" he mockingly asked, \"to\nreform the religion of the Egyptians?\"--only to be met with the\nconfident retort of Apollonius: \"Any sage who comes from the Indians.\"\nHere as elsewhere Apollonius set his face against blood-sacrifice, and\ntried to substitute instead, as he had attempted elsewhere, the offering\nof frankincense modelled in the form of the victim (v. 25). Many abuses\nhe tried to reform in the manners of the Alexandrians, but upon none was\nhe more severe than on their wild excitement over horse-racing, which\nfrequently led to bloodshed (v. 26).\n\nApollonius seems to have spent most of the remaining twenty years of his\nlife in Egypt, but of what he did in the secret shrines of that land of\nmystery we can learn nothing from Philostratus, except that on the\nprotracted journey to Ethiopia up the Nile no city or temple or\ncommunity was unvisited, and everywhere there was an interchange of\nadvice and instruction in sacred things (v. 43).\n\n\n\n\nSECTION X.\n\nTHE GYMNOSOPHISTS OF UPPER EGYPT.\n\n\nWe now come to Apollonius' visit to the \"Gymnosophists\" in \"Ethiopia,\"\nwhich, though the artistic and literary goal of Apollonius' journey in\nEgypt as elaborated by Philostratus, is only a single incident in the\nreal history of the unrecorded life of our mysterious philosopher in\nthat ancient land.\n\nHad Philostratus devoted a chapter or two to the nature of the\npractices, discipline, and doctrines of the innumerable ascetic and\nmystic communities that honeycombed Egypt and adjacent lands in those\ndays, he would have earned the boundless gratitude of students of the\norigins. But of all this he has no word; and yet he would have us\nbelieve that Damis' reminiscences were an orderly series of notes of\nwhat actually happened. But in all things it is very apparent that Damis\nwas rather a _compagnon de voyage_ than an initiated pupil.\n\nWho then were these mysterious \"Gymnosophists,\" as they are usually\ncalled, and whence their name? Damis calls them simply the \"Naked\"\n([Greek: gymnoi]), and it is very clear that the term is not to be\nunderstood as merely physically naked; indeed, neither to the Indians\nnor to these ascetics of uppermost Egypt can the term be applied with\nappropriateness in its purely physical meaning, as is apparent from the\ndescriptions of Damis and Philostratus. A chance sentence that falls\nfrom the lips of one of these ascetics, in giving the story of his life,\naffords us a clue to the real meaning of the term. \"At the age of\nfourteen,\" he tells Apollonius, \"I resigned my patrimony to those who\ndesired such things, and _naked_ I sought the _Naked_\" (vi. 16).[106]\n\nThis is the very same diction that Philo uses about the Therapeut\ncommunities, which he declares were very numerous in every province of\nEgypt and scattered in all lands. We are not, however, to suppose that\nthese communities were all of the same nature. It is true that Philo\ntries to make out that the most pious and the chief of all of them was\n_his_ particular community on the southern shore of Lake Moeris, which\nwas strongly Semitic if not orthodoxly Jewish; and for Philo any\ncommunity with a Jewish atmosphere must naturally have been the best.\nThe peculiarity and main interest of our community, which was at the\nother end of the land above the cataracts, was that it had had some\nremote connection with India.\n\nThe community is called a [Greek: phrontist\u00earion], in the sense of a\nplace for meditation, a term used by ecclesiastical writers for a\nmonastery, but best known to classical students from the humorous use\nmade of it by Aristophanes, who in The Clouds calls the school of\nSocrates, a _phrontist[=e]rion_ or \"thinking shop.\" The collection of\n_monasteria_ ([Greek: hiera]), presumably caves, shrines, or cells,[107]\nwas situated on a hill or rising ground not far from the Nile. They were\nall separated from one another, dotted about the hill, and ingeniously\narranged. There was hardly a tree in the place, with the exception of a\nsingle group of palms, under whose shade they held their general\nmeetings (vi. 6).\n\nIt is difficult to gather from the set speeches, put into the mouths of\nthe head of the community and Apollonius (vi. 10-13, 18-22), any precise\ndetails as to the mode of life of these ascetics, beyond the general\nindications of an existence of great toil and physical hardship, which\nthey considered the only means of gaining wisdom. What the nature of\ntheir cult was, if they had one, we are not told, except that at mid-day\nthe Naked retired to their _monasteria_ (vi. 14).\n\nThe whole tendency of Apollonius' arguments, however, is to remind the\ncommunity of its Eastern origin and its former connection with India,\nwhich it seems to have forgotten. The communities of this particular\nkind in southern Egypt and northern Ethiopia dated back presumably some\ncenturies, and some of them may have been remotely Buddhist, for one of\nthe younger members of our community who left it to follow Apollonius,\nsays that he came to join it from the enthusiastic account of the wisdom\nof the Indians brought back by his father, who had been captain of a\nvessel trading to the East. It was his father who told him that these\n\"Ethiopians\" were from India, and so he had joined them instead of\nmaking the long and perilous journey to the Indus itself (vi. 16).\n\nIf there be any truth in this story it follows that the founders of this\nway of life had been Indian ascetics, and if so they must have belonged\nto the only propagandising form of Indian religion, namely, the\nBuddhist.\n\nAfter the impulse had been given, the communities, which were\npresumably recruited from generations of Egyptians, Arabs, and\nEthiopians, were probably left entirely to themselves, and so in course\nof time forgot their origin, and even perhaps their original rule. Such\nspeculations are permissible, owing to the _repeated_ assertion of the\noriginal connection between these Gymnosophists and India. The whole\nburden of the story is that they were Indians who had forgotten their\norigin and fallen away from the wisdom.\n\nThe last incident that Philostratus records with regard to Apollonius\namong the shrines and temples is a visit to the famous and very ancient\noracle of Trophonius, near Lebadea, in Boeotia. Apollonius is said to\nhave spent seven days alone in this mysterious \"cave,\" and to have\nreturned with a book full of questions and answers on the subject of\n\"philosophy\" (viii. 19). This book was still, in the time of\nPhilostratus, in the palace of Hadrian at Antium, together with a number\nof letters of Apollonius, and many people used to visit Antium for the\nspecial purpose of seeing it (viii. 19, 20).\n\nIn the hay-bundle of legendary rigmarole solemnly set down by\nPhilostratus concerning the cave of Trophonius, a small needle of truth\nmay perhaps be discovered. The \"cave\" seems to have been a very ancient\ntemple or shrine, cut in the heart of a hill, to which a number of\nunderground passages of considerable length led. It had probably been\nin ancient times one of the most holy centres of the archaic cult of\nHellas, perhaps even a relic of that Greece of thousands of years B.C.,\nthe only tradition of which, as Plato tells us, was obtained by Solon\nfrom the priests of Sa\u00efs. Or it may have been a subterranean shrine of\nthe same nature as the famous Dict\u00e6an cave in Crete which only last year\nwas brought back to light by the indefatigable labours of Messrs. Evans\nand Hogarth.\n\nAs in the case of the travels of Apollonius, so with regard to the\ntemples and communities which he visited, Philostratus is a most\ndisappointing _cicerone_. But perhaps he is not to be blamed on this\naccount, for the most important and most interesting part of Apollonius'\nwork was of so intimate a nature, prosecuted as it was among\nassociations of such jealously-guarded secrecy, that no one outside\ntheir ranks could know anything of it, and those who shared in their\ninitiation would say nothing.\n\nIt is, therefore, only when Apollonius comes forward to do some public\nact that we can get any precise historical trace of him; in every other\ncase he passes into the sanctuary of a temple or enters the privacy of a\ncommunity and is lost to view.\n\nIt may perhaps surprise us that Apollonius, after sacrificing his\nprivate fortune, could nevertheless undertake such long and expensive\ntravels, but it would seem that he was occasionally supplied with the\nnecessary monies from the treasuries of the temples (_cf._ viii. 17),\nand that everywhere he was freely offered the hospitality of the temple\nor community in the place where he happened to be staying.\n\nIn conclusion of the present part of our subject, we may mention the\ngood service done by Apollonius in driving away certain Chald\u00e6an and\nEgyptian charlatans who were making capital out of the fears of the\ncities on the left shores of the Hellespont. These cities had suffered\nseverely from shocks of earthquake, and in their panic placed large sums\nof money in the hands of these adventurers (who \"trafficked in the\nmisfortunes of others\"), in order that they might perform propitiatory\nrites (vi. 41). This taking money for the giving instruction in the\nsacred science or for the performance of sacred rites was the most\ndetestable of crimes to all the true philosophers.\n\n\n\n\nSECTION XI.\n\nAPOLLONIUS AND THE RULERS OF THE EMPIRE.\n\n\nBut not only did Apollonius vivify and reconsecrate the old centres of\nreligion for some inscrutable reason, and do what he could to help on\nthe religious life of the time in its multiplex phases, but he took a\ndecided, though indirect, part in influencing the destinies of the\nEmpire through the persons of its supreme rulers.\n\nThis influence, however, was invariably of a moral and not of a\npolitical nature. It was brought to bear by means of philosophical\nconverse and instruction, by word of mouth or letter. Just as Apollonius\non his travels conversed on philosophy, and discoursed on the life of a\nwise man and the duties of a wise ruler, with kings,[108] rulers, and\nmagistrates, so he endeavoured to advise for their good those of the\nemperors who would listen to him.\n\nVespasian, Titus, and Nerva were all, prior to their elevation to the\npurple, friends and admirers of Apollonius, while Nero and Domitian\nregarded the philosopher with dismay.\n\nDuring Apollonius' short stay in Rome, in 66 A.D., although he never let\nthe slightest word escape him that could be construed by the numerous\ninformers into a treasonable utterance, he was nevertheless brought\nbefore Tigellinus, the infamous favourite of Nero, and subjected to a\nsevere cross-examination. Apparently up to this time Apollonius, working\nfor the future, had confined his attention entirely to the reformation\nof religion and the restoration of the ancient institutions of the\nnations, but the tyrannical conduct of Nero, which gave peace not even\nto the most blameless philosophers, at length opened his eyes to a more\nimmediate evil, which seemed no less than the abrogation of the liberty\nof conscience by an irresponsible tyranny. From this time onwards,\ntherefore, we find him keenly interested in the persons of the\nsuccessive emperors.\n\nIndeed Damis, although he confesses his entire ignorance of the purpose\nof Apollonius' journey to Spain after his expulsion from Rome, would\nhave it that it was to aid the forthcoming revolt against Nero. He\nconjectures this from a three days' secret interview that Apollonius had\nwith the Governor of the Province of B\u00e6tica, who came to Cadiz\nespecially to see him, and declares that the last words of Apollonius'\nvisitor were: \"Farewell, and remember Vindex\" (v. 10).\n\nIt is true that almost immediately afterwards the revolt of Vindex, the\nGovernor of Gaul, broke out, but the whole life and character of\nApollonius is opposed to any idea of political intrigue; on the\ncontrary, he bravely withstood tyranny and injustice to the face. He was\nopposed to the idea of Euphrates, a philosopher of quite a different\nstamp, who would have put an end to the monarchy and restored the\nrepublic (v. 33); he believed that government by a monarch was the best\nfor the Empire, but he desired above all other things to see the \"flock\nof mankind\" led by a \"wise and faithful shepherd\" (v. 35).\n\nSo that though Apollonius supported Vespasian as long as he worthily\ntried to follow out this ideal, he immediately rebuked him to his face\nwhen he deprived the Greek cities of their privileges. \"You have\nenslaved Greece,\" he wrote. \"You have reduced a free people to slavery\"\n(v. 41). Nevertheless, in spite of this rebuke, Vespasian in his last\nletter to his son Titus, confesses that they are what they are solely\nowing to the good advice of Apollonius (v. 30).\n\nEqually so he journeyed to Rome to meet Domitian face to face, and\nthough he was put on trial and every effort made to prove him guilty of\ntreasonable plotting with Nerva, he could not be convicted of anything\nof a political nature. Nerva was a good man, he told the emperor, and no\ntraitor. Not that Domitian had really any suspicion that Apollonius was\npersonally plotting against him; he cast him into prison solely in the\nhope that he might induce the philosopher to disclose the confidences of\nNerva and other prominent men who were objects of suspicion to him, and\nwho he imagined had consulted Apollonius on their chances of success.\nApollonius' business was not with politics, but with the \"princes who\nasked him for his advice on the subject of virtue\" (vi. 43).\n\n\n\n\nSECTION XII.\n\nAPOLLONIUS THE PROPHET AND WONDER-WORKER.\n\n\nWe will now turn our attention for a brief space to that side of\nApollonius' life which has made him the subject of invincible prejudice.\nApollonius was not only a philosopher, in the sense of being a\ntheoretical speculator or of being the follower of an ordered mode of\nlife schooled in the discipline of resignation; he was also a\nphilosopher in the original Pythagorean meaning of the term--a knower of\nNature's secrets, who thus could speak as one having authority.\n\nHe knew the hidden things of Nature by sight and not by hearing; for him\nthe path of philosophy was a life whereby the man himself became an\ninstrument of knowing. Religion, for Apollonius, was not a faith only,\nit was a science. For him the shows of things were but ever-changing\nappearances; cults and rites, religions and faiths, were all one to him,\nprovided the right spirit were behind them. The Tyanean knew no\ndifferences of race or creed; such narrow limitations were not for the\nphilosopher.\n\nBeyond all others would he have laughed to hear the word \"miracle\"\napplied to his doings. \"Miracle,\" in its Christian theological sense,\nwas an unknown term in antiquity, and is a vestige of superstition\nto-day. For though many believe that it is possible by means of the soul\nto effect a multitude of things beyond the possibilities of a science\nwhich is confined entirely to the investigation of physical forces, none\nbut the unthinking believe that there can be any interference in the\nworking of the laws which Deity has impressed upon Nature--the credo of\nMiraculists.\n\nMost of the recorded wonder-doings of Apollonius are cases of prophecy\nor foreseeing; of seeing at a distance and seeing the past; of seeing or\nhearing in vision; of healing the sick or curing cases of obsession or\npossession.\n\nAlready as a youth, in the temple at \u00c6g\u00e6, Apollonius gave signs of the\npossession of the rudiments of this psychic insight; not only did he\nsense correctly the nature of the dark past of a rich but unworthy\nsuppliant who desired the restoration of his eyesight, but he foretold,\nthough unclearly, the evil end of one who made an attempt upon his\ninnocence (i. 12).\n\nOn meeting with Damis, his future faithful henchman volunteered his\nservices for the long journey to India on the ground that he knew the\nlanguages of several of the countries through which they had to pass.\n\"But I understand them all, though I have learned none of them,\"\nanswered Apollonius, in his usual enigmatical fashion, and added:\n\"Marvel not that I know all the tongues of men, for I know even what\nthey never say\" (i. 19). And by this he meant simply that he could read\nmen's thoughts, not that he could speak all languages. But Damis and\nPhilostratus cannot understand so simple a fact of psychic experience;\nthey will have it that he knew not only the language of all men, but\nalso of birds and beasts (i. 20).\n\nIn his conversation with the Babylonian monarch Vardan, Apollonius\ndistinctly claims foreknowledge. He says that he is a physician of the\nsoul and can free the king from the diseases of the mind, not only\nbecause he knows what ought to be done, that is to say the proper\ndiscipline taught in the Pythagorean and similar schools, but also\nbecause he foreknows the nature of the king (i. 32). Indeed we are told\nthat the subject of foreknowledge ([Greek: progn\u00f4se\u00f4s]), of which\nscience ([Greek: sophia]) Apollonius was a deep student, was one of the\nprincipal topics discussed by our philosopher and his Indian hosts (iii.\n42).\n\nIn fact, as Apollonius tells his philosophical and studious friend the\nRoman Consul Telesinus, for him wisdom was a kind of divinizing or\nmaking divine of the whole nature, a sort of perpetual state of\ninspiration ([Greek: theiasmos]) (iv. 40). And so we are told that\nApollonius was apprised of all things of this nature by the energy of\nhis d\u00e6monial nature ([Greek: daimoni\u00f4s]) (vii. 10). Now for the student\nof the Pythagorean and Platonic schools the \"d\u00e6mon\" of a man was what\nmay be called the higher self, the spiritual side of the soul as\ndistinguished from the purely human. It is the better part of the man,\nand when his physical consciousness is at-oned with this \"dweller in\nheaven,\" he has (according to the highest mystic philosophy of ancient\nGreece) while still on earth the powers of those incorporeal\nintermediate beings between Gods and men called \"d\u00e6mons\"; a stage higher\nstill, the living man becomes at-oned with his divine soul, he becomes a\nGod on earth; and yet a stage higher he becomes at one with the Good and\nso becomes God.\n\nHence we find Apollonius indignantly rejecting the accusation of magic\nignorantly brought against him, an art which achieved its results by\nmeans of compacts with those low entities with which the outermost realm\nof inner Nature swarms. Our philosopher repudiated equally the idea of\nhis being a soothsayer or diviner. With such arts he would have nothing\nto do; if ever he uttered anything which savoured of foreknowledge, let\nthem know it was not by divination in the vulgar sense, but owing to\n\"that wisdom which God reveals to the wise\" (iv. 44).\n\nThe most numerous wonder-doings ascribed to Apollonius are instances\nprecisely of such foreknowledge or prophecy.[109] It must be confessed\nthat the utterances recorded are often obscure and enigmatical, but this\nis the usual case with such prophecy; for future events are most\nfrequently either seen in symbolic representations, the meaning of which\nis not clear until after the event, or heard in equally enigmatical\nsentences. At times, however, we have instances of very precise\nforeknowledge, such as the refusal of Apollonius to go on board a vessel\nwhich foundered on the voyage (v. 18).\n\nThe instances of seeing present events at a distance, however--such as\nthe burning of a temple at Rome, which Apollonius saw while at\nAlexandria--are clear enough. Indeed, if people know nothing else of the\nTyanean, they have at least heard how he saw at Ephesus the\nassassination of Domitian at Rome at the very moment of its occurrence.\n\nIt was mid-day, to quote from the graphic account of Philostratus, and\nApollonius was in one of the small parks or groves in the suburbs,\nengaged in delivering an address on some absorbing topic of philosophy.\n\"At first he sank his voice as though in some apprehension; he, however,\ncontinued his exposition, but haltingly, and with far less force than\nusual, as a man who had some other subject in his mind than that on\nwhich he is speaking; finally he ceased speaking altogether as though he\ncould not find his words. Then staring fixedly on the ground, he started\nforward three or four paces, crying out: 'Strike the tyrant; strike!'\nAnd this, not like a man who sees an image in a mirror, but as one with\nthe actual scene before his eyes, as though he were himself taking part\nin it.\"\n\nTurning to his astonished audience he told them what he had seen. But\nthough they hoped it were true, they refused to believe it, and thought\nthat Apollonius had taken leave of his senses. But the philosopher\ngently answered: You, on your part, are right to suspend your rejoicings\ntill the news is brought you in the usual fashion; \"as for me, I go to\nreturn thanks to the Gods for what I have myself seen\" (viii. 26).\n\nLittle wonder, then, if we read, not only of a number of symbolic\ndreams, but of their proper interpretation, one of the most important\nbranches of the esoteric discipline of the school. (See especially i. 23\nand iv. 34.) Nor are we surprised to hear that Apollonius, relying\nentirely on his inner knowledge, was instrumental in obtaining the\nreprieve of an innocent man at Alexandria, who was on the point of being\nexecuted with a batch of criminals (v. 24). Indeed, he seems to have\nknown the secret past of many with whom he came in contact (vi. 3, 5).\n\nThe possession of such powers can put but little strain on the belief of\na generation like our own, to which such facts of psychic science are\nbecoming with every day more familiar. Nor should instances of curing\ndisease by mesmeric processes astonish us, or even the so-called\n\"casting out of evil spirits,\" if we give credence to the Gospel\nnarrative and are familiar with the general history of the times in\nwhich such healing of possession and obsession was a commonplace. This,\nhowever, does not condemn us to any endorsement of the fantastic\ndescriptions of such happenings in which Philostratus indulges. If it be\ncredible that Apollonius was successful in dealing with obscure mental\ncases--cases of obsession and possession--with which our hospitals and\nasylums are filled to-day, and which are for the most part beyond the\nskill of official science owing to its ignorance of the real agencies at\nwork, it is equally evident that Damis and Philostratus had little\nunderstanding of the matter, and have given full rein to their\nimagination in their narratives. (See ii. 4; iv. 20, 25; v. 42; vi. 27,\n43.) Perhaps, however, Philostratus in some instances is only repeating\npopular legend, the best case of which is the curing of the plague at\nEphesus which the Tyanean had foretold on so many occasions. Popular\nlegend would have it that the cause of the plague was traced to an old\nbeggar man, who was buried under a heap of stones by the infuriated\npopulace. On Apollonius ordering the stones to be removed, it was found\nthat what had been a beggar man was now a mad dog foaming at the mouth\n(iv. 10)!\n\nOn the contrary, the account of Apollonius' \"restoring to life\" a young\ngirl of noble birth at Rome, is told with great moderation. Our\nphilosopher seems to have met the funeral procession by chance;\nwhereupon he suddenly went up to the bier, and, after making some passes\nover the maiden, and saying some inaudible words, \"waked her out of her\nseeming death.\" But, says Damis, \"whether Apollonius noticed that the\nspark of the soul was still alive which her friends had failed to\nperceive--they say it was raining lightly and a slight vapour showed on\nher face--or whether he made the life in her warm again and so restored\nher,\" neither himself nor any who were present could say (iv. 45).\n\nOf a distinctly more phenomenal nature are the stories of Apollonius\ncausing the writing to disappear from the tablets of one of his accusers\nbefore Tigellinus (iv. 44); of his drawing his leg out of the fetters to\nshow Damis that he was not really a prisoner though chained in the\ndungeons of Domitian (vii. 38); and of his \"disappearing\" ([Greek:\n\u00eaphanisth\u00ea]) from the tribunal (viii. 5).[110]\n\nWe are not, however, to suppose that Apollonius despised or neglected\nthe study of physical phenomena in his devotion to the inner science of\nthings. On the contrary, we have several instances of his rejection of\nmythology in favour of a physical explanation of natural phenomena.\nSuch, for instance, are his explanations of the volcanic activity of\n\u00c6tna (v. 14, 17), and of a tidal wave in Crete, the latter being\naccompanied with a correct indication of the more immediate result of\nthe occurrence. In fact an island had been thrown up far out to sea by a\nsubmarine disturbance as was subsequently ascertained (iv. 34). The\nexplanation of the tides at Cadiz may also be placed in the same\ncategory (v. 2).\n\n\n\n\nSECTION XIII.\n\nHIS MODE OF LIFE.\n\n\nWe will now present the reader with some general indications of the mode\nof life of Apollonius, and the manner of his teaching, of which already\nsomething has been said under the heading \"Early Life.\"\n\nOur philosopher was an enthusiastic follower of the Pythagorean\ndiscipline; nay, Philostratus would have us believe that he made more\nsuperhuman efforts to reach wisdom than even the great Samian (i. 2).\nThe outer forms of this discipline as exemplified in Pythagoras are thus\nsummed up by our author.\n\n\"Naught would he wear that came from a dead beast, nor touch a morsel of\na thing that once had life, nor offer it in sacrifice; not for him to\nstain with blood the altars; but honey-cakes and incense, and the\nservice of his song went upward from the man unto the Gods, for well he\nknew that they would take such gifts far rather than the oxen in their\nhundreds with the knife. For he, in sooth, held converse with the Gods\nand learned from them how they were pleased with men and how displeased,\nand thence as well he drew his nature-lore. As for the rest, he said,\nthey guessed at the divine, and held opinions on the Gods which proved\neach other false; but unto him Apollo's self did come, confessed,\nwithout disguise,[111] and there did come as well, though unconfessed,\nAthena and the Muses, and other Gods whose forms and names mankind did\nnot yet know.\"\n\nHence his disciples regarded Pythagoras as an inspired teacher, and\nreceived his rules as laws. \"In particular did they keep the rule of\nsilence regarding the divine science. For they heard within them many\ndivine and unspeakable things on which it would have been difficult for\nthem to keep silence, had they not first learned that it was just this\nsilence which spoke to them\" (i. 1).\n\nSuch was the general declaration of the nature of the Pythagorean\ndiscipline by its disciples. But, says Apollonius in his address to the\nGymnosophists, Pythagoras was not the inventor of it. It was the\nimmemorial wisdom, and Pythagoras himself had learnt it from the\nIndians.[112] This wisdom, he continued, had spoken to him in his youth;\nshe had said:\n\n\"For sense, young sir, I have no charms; my cup is filled with toils\nunto the brim. Would anyone embrace my way of life, he must resolve to\nbanish from his board all food that once bore life, to lose the memory\nof wine, and thus no more to wisdom's cup befoul--the cup that doth\nconsist of wine-untainted souls. Nor shall wool warm him, nor aught\nthat's made from any beast. I give my servants shoes of bast and as they\ncan to sleep. And if I find them overcome with love's delights, I've\nready pits down into which that justice which doth follow hard on\nwisdom's foot, doth drag and thrust them; indeed, so stern am I to those\nwho choose my way, that e'en upon their tongues I bind a chain. Now hear\nfrom me what things thou'lt gain, if thou endure. An innate sense of\nfitness and of right, and ne'er to feel that any's lot is better than\nthy own; tyrants to strike with fear instead of being a fearsome slave\nto tyranny; to have the Gods more greatly bless thy scanty gifts than\nthose who pour before them blood of bulls. If thou art pure, I'll give\nthee how to know what things will be as well, and fill thy eyes so full\nof light, that thou may'st recognise the Gods, the heroes know, and\nprove and try the shadowy forms that feign the shapes of men\" (vi. 11).\n\nThe whole life of Apollonius shows that he tried to carry out\nconsistently this rule of life, and the repeated statements that he\nwould never join in the blood-sacrifices of the popular cults (see\nespecially i. 24, 31; iv. 11; v. 25), but openly condemned them, show\nnot only that the Pythagorean school had ever set the example of the\nhigher way of purer offerings, but that they were not only not condemned\nand persecuted as heretics on this account, but were rather regarded as\nbeing of peculiar sanctity, and as following a life superior to that of\nordinary mortals.\n\nThe refraining from the flesh of animals, however, was not simply based\nupon ideas of purity, it found additional sanction in the positive love\nof the lower kingdoms and the horror of inflicting pain on any living\ncreature. Thus Apollonius bluntly refused to take any part in the chase,\nwhen invited to do so by his royal host at Babylon. \"Sire,\" he replied,\n\"have you forgotten that even when you sacrifice I will not be present?\nMuch less then would I do these beasts to death, and all the more when\ntheir spirit is broken and they are penned in contrary to their nature\"\n(i. 38).[113]\n\nBut though Apollonius was an unflinching task-master unto himself, he\ndid not wish to impose his mode of life on others, even on his personal\nfriends and companions (provided of course they did not adopt it of\ntheir own free will). Thus he tells Damis that he has no wish to\nprohibit him from eating flesh and drinking wine, he simply demands the\nright of refraining himself and of defending his conduct if called on to\ndo so (ii. 7). This is an additional indication that Damis was not a\nmember of the inner circle of discipline, and the latter fact explains\nwhy so faithful a follower of the person of Apollonius was nevertheless\nso much in the dark.\n\nNot only so, but Apollonius even dissuades the R[=a]j[=a]h Phraotes, his\nfirst host in India, who desired to adopt his strict rule, from doing\nso, on the ground that it would estrange him too much from his subjects\n(ii. 37).\n\nThree times a day Apollonius prayed and meditated; at daybreak (vi. 10,\n18; vii. 31), at mid-day (vii. 10), and at sun-down (viii. 13). This\nseems to have been his invariable custom; no matter where he was he\nseems to have devoted at least a few moments to silent meditation at\nthese times. The object of his worship is always said to have been the\n\"Sun,\" that is to say the Lord of our world and its sister worlds, whose\nglorious symbol is the orb of day.\n\nWe have already seen in the short sketch devoted to his \"Early Life\" how\nhe divided the day and portioned out his time among his different\nclasses of hearers and inquirers. His style of teaching and speaking was\nthe opposite of that of a rhetorician or professional orator. There was\nno art in his sentences, no striving after effect, no affectation. But\nhe spoke \"as from a tripod,\" with such words as \"I know,\" \"Methinks,\"\n\"Why do ye,\" \"Ye should know.\" His sentences were short and compact, and\nhis words carried conviction with them and fitted the facts. His task,\nhe declared, was no longer to seek and to question as he had done in his\nyouth, but to teach what he knew (i. 17). He did not use the dialectic\nof the Socratic school, but would have his hearers turn from all else\nand give ear to the inner voice of philosophy alone (iv. 2). He drew his\nillustrations from any chance occurrence or homely happening (iv. 3; vi.\n3, 38), and pressed all into service for the improvement of his\nlisteners.\n\nWhen put on his trial, he would make no preparation for his defence. He\nhad lived his life as it came from day to day, prepared for death, and\nwould continue to do so (viii. 30). Moreover it was now his deliberate\nchoice to challenge death in the cause of philosophy. And so to his old\nfriend's repeated solicitations to prepare his defence, he replied:\n\n\"Damis, you seem to lose your wits in face of death, though you have\nbeen so long with me and I have loved philosophy e'en from my\nyouth;[114] I thought that you were both yourself prepared for death and\nknew full well my generalship in this. For just as warriors in the field\nhave need not only of good courage but also of that generalship which\ntells them when to fight, so too must they who wisdom love make careful\nstudy of good times to die, that they may choose the best and not be\ndone to death all unprepared. That I have chosen best and picked the\nmoment which suits wisdom best to give death battle--if so it be that\nany one should wish to slay me--I've proved to other friends when you\nwere by, nor ever ceased to teach you it alone\" (vii. 31).\n\nThe above are some few indications of how our philosopher lived, in fear\nof nothing but disloyalty to his high ideal. We will now make mention of\nsome of his more personal traits, and of some of the names of his\nfollowers.\n\n\n\n\nSECTION XIV.\n\nHIMSELF AND HIS CIRCLE.\n\n\nApollonius is said to have been very beautiful to look upon (i. 7, 12;\niv. 1);[115] but beyond this we have no very definite description of his\nperson. His manner was ever mild and gentle (i. 36; ii. 22) and modest\n(iv. 31; viii. 15), and in this, says Damis, he was more like an Indian\nthan a Greek (iii. 36); yet occasionally he burst out indignantly\nagainst some special enormity (iv. 30). His mood was often pensive (i.\n34), and when not speaking he would remain for long plunged in deep\nthought, during which his eyes were steadfastly fixed on the ground (i.\n10 et al.).\n\nThough, as we have seen, he was inflexibly stern with himself, he was\never ready to make excuses for others; if, on the one hand, he praised\nthe courage of those few who remained with him at Rome, on the other he\nrefused to blame for their cowardice the many who had fled (iv. 38). Nor\nwas his gentleness shown simply by abstention from blame, he was ever\nactive in positive deeds of compassion (cf. vi. 39).\n\nOne of his little peculiarities was a liking to be addressed as\n\"Tyanean\" (vii. 38), but why this was so we are not told. It can hardly\nhave been that Apollonius was particularly proud of his birth-place, for\neven though he was a great lover of Greece, so that at times you would\ncall him an enthusiastic patriot, his love for other countries was\nquite as pronounced. Apollonius was a citizen of the world, if there has\never been one, into whose speech the word native-land did not enter, and\na priest of universal religion in whose vocabulary the word sect did not\nexist.\n\nIn spite of his extremely ascetic life he was a man of strong physique,\nso that even when he had reached the ripe age of four-score years, we\nare told, he was sound and healthy in every limb and organ, upright and\nperfectly formed. There was also a certain indefinite charm about him\nthat made him more pleasant to look upon than even the freshness of\nyouth, and this even though his face was furrowed with wrinkles, just as\nthe statues in the temple at Tyana represented him in the time of\nPhilostratus. In fact, says his rhetorical biographer, report sang\nhigher praises over the charm of Apollonius in his old age than over the\nbeauty of Alcibiades in his youth (viii. 29).\n\nIn brief, our philosopher seems to have been of a most charming presence\nand lovable disposition; nor was his absolute devotion to philosophy of\nthe nature of the hermit ideal, for he passed his life among men. What\nwonder then that he attracted to himself many followers and disciples!\nIt would have been interesting if Philostratus had told us more about\nthese \"Apollonians,\" as they were called (viii. 21), and whether they\nconstituted a distinct school, or whether they were grouped together in\ncommunities on the Pythagorean model, or whether they were simply\nindependent students attracted to the most commanding personality of the\ntimes in the domain of philosophy. It is, however, certain that many of\nthem wore the same dress as himself and followed his mode of life (iv.\n39). Repeated mention is also made of their accompanying Apollonius on\nhis travels (iv. 47; v. 21; viii. 19, 21, 24), sometimes as many as ten\nof them at the same time, but none of them were allowed to address\nothers until they had fulfilled the vow of silence (v. 43).\n\nThe most distinguished of his followers were Musonius, who was\nconsidered the greatest philosopher of the time after the Tyanean, and\nwho was the special victim of Nero's tyranny (iv. 44; v. 19; vii. 16),\nand Demetrius, \"who loved Apollonius\" (iv. 25, 42; v. 19; vi. 31; vii.\n10; viii. 10). These names are well known to history; of names otherwise\nunknown are the Egyptian Dioscorides, who was left behind owing to weak\nhealth on the long journey to Ethiopia (iv. 11, 38; v. 43), Menippus,\nwhom he had freed from an obsession (iv. 25, 38; v. 43), Ph\u00e6dimus (iv.\n11), and Nilus, who joined him from Gymnosophists (v. 10 _sqq._, 28),\nand of course Damis, who would have us think that he was always with\nhim from the time of their meeting at Ninus.\n\nOn the whole we are inclined to think that Apollonius did not establish\nany fresh organisation; he made use of those already existing, and his\ndisciples were those who were attracted to him personally by an\novermastering affection which could only be satisfied by being\ncontinually near him. This much seems certain, that he trained no one to\ncarry on his task; he came and went, helping and illuminating, but he\nhanded on no tradition of a definite line, and founded no school to be\ncontinued by successors. Even to his ever faithful companion, when\nbidding him farewell for what he knew would be the last time for Damis\non earth, he had no word to say about the work to which he had devoted\nhis life, but which Damis had never understood. His last words were for\nDamis alone, for the man who had loved him, but who had never known him.\nIt was a promise to come to him if he needed help. \"Damis, whenever you\nthink on high matters in solitary meditation, you shall see me\" (viii.\n28).\n\nWe will next turn our attention to a consideration of some of the\nsayings ascribed to Apollonius and the speeches put into his mouth by\nPhilostratus. The shorter sayings are in all probability authentically\ntraditional, but the speeches are for the most part manifestly the\nartistic working-up of the rough notes of Damis. In fact, they are\ndefinitely declared to be so; but they are none the less interesting on\nthis account, and for two reasons.\n\nIn the first place, they honestly avow their nature, and make no claim\nof inspiration; they are confessedly human documents which endeavour to\ngive a literary dress to the traditional body of thought and endeavour\nwhich the life of the philosopher built into the minds of his hearers.\nThe method was common to antiquity, and the ancient compilers of certain\nother series of famous documents would have been struck with amazement\nhad they been able to see how posterity would divinise their efforts and\nregard them as immediately inspired by the source of all wisdom.\n\nIn the second place, although we are not to suppose that we are reading\nthe actual words of Apollonius, we are nevertheless conscious of being\nin immediate contact with the inner atmosphere of the best religious\nthought of the Greek mind, and have before our eyes the picture of a\nmystic and spiritual fermentation which leavened all strata of society\nin the first century of our era.\n\n\n\n\nSECTION XV.\n\nFROM HIS SAYINGS AND SERMONS.\n\n\nApollonius believed in prayer, but how differently from the vulgar. For\nhim the idea that the Gods could be swayed from the path of rigid\njustice by the entreaties of men, was a blasphemy; that the Gods could\nbe made parties to our selfish hopes and fears was to our philosopher\nunthinkable. One thing alone he knew, that the Gods were the ministers\nof right and the rigid dispensers of just desert. The common belief,\nwhich has persisted to our own day, that God can be swayed from His\npurpose, that compacts could be made with Him or with His ministers, was\nentirely abhorrent to Apollonius. Beings with whom such pacts could be\nmade, who could be swayed and turned, were not Gods but less than men.\nAnd so we find Apollonius as a youth conversing with one of the priests\nof \u00c6sculapius as follows:\n\n\"Since then the Gods know all things, I think that one who enters the\ntemple with a right conscience within him should pray thus: 'Give me,\nye Gods, what is my due!'\" (i. 11).\n\nAnd thus again on his long journey to India he prayed at Babylon: \"God\nof the sun, send thou me o'er the earth so far as e'er 'tis good for\nThee and me; and may I come to know the good, and never know the bad nor\nthey know me\" (i. 31).\n\nOne of his most general prayers, Damis tells us, was to this effect:\n\"Grant me, ye Gods, to have little and need naught\" (i. 34).\n\n\"When you enter the temples, for what do you pray?\" asked the Pontifex\nMaximus Telesinus of our philosopher. \"I pray,\" said Apollonius, \"that\nrighteousness may rule, the laws remain unbroken, the wise be poor and\nothers rich, but honestly\" (iv. 40).\n\nThe belief of the philosopher in the grand ideal of having nothing and\nyet possessing all things, is exemplified by his reply to the officer\nwho asked him how he dared enter the dominions of Babylon without\npermission. \"The whole earth,\" said Apollonius, \"is mine; and it is\ngiven me to journey through it\" (i. 21).\n\nThere are many instances of sums of money being offered to Apollonius\nfor his services, but he invariably refused them; not only so but his\nfollowers also refused all presents. On the occasion when King Vardan,\nwith true Oriental generosity, offered them gifts, they turned away;\nwhereupon Apollonius said: \"You see, my hands, though many, are all like\neach other.\" And when the king asked Apollonius what present he would\nbring him back from India, our philosopher replied: \"A gift that will\nplease you, sire. For if my stay there should make me wiser, I shall\ncome back to you better than I am\" (i. 41).\n\nWhen they were crossing the great mountains into India a conversation is\nsaid to have taken place between Apollonius and Damis, which presents us\nwith a good instance of how our philosopher ever used the incidents of\nthe day to inculcate the higher lessons of life. The question was\nconcerning the \"below\" and \"above.\" Yesterday, said Damis, we were\n_below_ in the valley; to-day we are _above_, high on the mountains, not\nfar distant from heaven. So this is what you mean by \"below\" and\n\"above,\" said Apollonius gently. Why, of course, impatiently retorted\nDamis, if I am in my right mind; what need of such useless questions?\nAnd have you acquired a greater knowledge of the divine nature by being\nnearer heaven on the tops of the mountains? continued his master. Do you\nthink that those who observe the heaven from the mountain heights are\nany nearer the understanding of things? Truth to tell, replied Damis,\nsomewhat crestfallen, I _did_ think I should come down wiser, for I've\nbeen up a higher mountain than any of them, but I fear I know no more\nthan before I ascended it. Nor do other men, replied Apollonius; \"such\nobservations make them see the heavens more blue, the stars more large,\nand the sun rise from the night, things known to those who tend the\nsheep and goats; but how God doth take thought for human kind, and how\nHe doth find pleasure in their service, and what is virtue,\nrighteousness, and common-sense, that neither Athos will reveal to those\nwho scale his summit nor yet Olympus who stirs the poet's wonder, unless\nit be the soul perceive them; for should the soul when pure and\nunalloyed essay such heights, I swear to thee, she wings her flight far\nfar beyond this lofty Caucasus\" (ii. 6).\n\nSo again, when at Thermopyl\u00e6 his followers were disputing as to which\nwas the highest ground in Greece, Mt. Oeta being then in view. They\nhappened to be just at the foot of the hill on which the Spartans fell\noverwhelmed with arrows. Climbing to the top of it Apollonius cried out:\n\"And I think _this_ the highest ground, for those who fell here for\nfreedom's sake have made it high as Oeta and raised it far above a\nthousand of Olympuses\" (iv. 23).\n\nAnother instance of how Apollonius turned chance happenings to good\naccount is the following. Once at Ephesus, in one of the covered walks\nnear the city, he was speaking of sharing our goods with others, and how\nwe ought mutually to help one another. It chanced that a number of\nsparrows were sitting on a tree hard by in perfect silence. Suddenly\nanother sparrow flew up and began chirping, as though it wanted to tell\nthe others something. Whereupon the little fellows all set to a-chirping\nalso, and flew away after the new-comer. Apollonius' superstitious\naudience were greatly struck by this conduct of the sparrows, and\nthought it was an augury of some important matter. But the philosopher\ncontinued with his sermon. The sparrow, he said, has invited his friends\nto a banquet. A boy slipped down in a lane hard by and spilt some corn\nhe was carrying in a bowl; he picked up most of it and went away. The\nlittle sparrow, chancing on the scattered grains, immediately flew off\nto invite his friends to the feast.\n\nThereon most of the crowd went off at a run to see if it were true, and\nwhen they came back shouting and all agog with wonderment, the\nphilosopher continued: \"Ye see what care the sparrows take of one\nanother, and how happy they are to share with all their goods. And yet\nwe men do not approve; nay, if we see a man sharing his goods with\nother men, we call it wastefulness, extravagance, and by such names, and\ndub the men to whom he gives a share, fawners and parasites. What then\nis left to us except to shut us up at home like fattening birds, and\ngorge our bellies in the dark until we burst with fat?\" (iv. 3).\n\nOn another occasion, at Smyrna, Apollonius, seeing a ship getting under\nweigh, used the occasion for teaching the people the lesson of\nco-operation. \"Behold the vessel's crew!\" he said. \"How some have manned\nthe boats, some raise the anchors up and make them fast, some set the\nsails to catch the wind, how others yet again look out at bow and stern.\nBut if a single man should fail to do a single one of these his duties,\nor bungle in his seamanship, their sailing will be bad, and they will\nhave the storm among them. But if they strive in rivalry each with the\nother, their only strife being that no man shall seem worse than his\nmates, fair havens shall there be for such a ship, and all good weather\nand fair voyage crowd in upon it\" (iv. 9).\n\nAgain, on another occasion, at Rhodes, Damis asked him if he thought\nanything greater than the famous Colossus. \"I do,\" replied Apollonius;\n\"the man who walks in wisdom's guileless paths that give us health\" (v.\n21).\n\nThere is also a number of instances of witty or sarcastic answers\nreported of our philosopher, and indeed, in spite of his generally grave\nmood, he not unfrequently rallied his hearers, and sometimes, if we may\nsay so, chaffed the foolishness out of them (see especially iv. 30).\n\nEven in times of great danger this characteristic shows itself. A good\ninstance is his answer to the dangerous question of Tigellinus, \"What\nthink you of Nero?\" \"I think better of him than you do,\" retorted\nApollonius, \"for you think he ought to sing, and I think he ought to\nkeep silence\" (iv. 44).\n\nSo again his reproof to a young Croesus of the period is as witty as it\nis wise. \"Young sir,\" he said, \"methinks it is not you who own your\nhouse, but your house you\" (v. 22).\n\nOf the same style also is his answer to a glutton who boasted of his\ngluttony. He copied Hercules, he said, who was as famous for the food he\nate as for his labours.\n\n\"Yes,\" said Apollonius, \"for he was Hercules. But _you_, what virtue\nhave you, midden-heap? Your only claim to notice is your chance of being\nburst\" (iv. 23).\n\nBut to turn to more serious occasions. In answer to Vespasian's earnest\nprayer, \"Teach me what should a good king do,\" Apollonius is said to\nhave replied somewhat in the following words:\n\n\"You ask me what can not be taught. For kingship is the greatest thing\nwithin a mortal's reach; it is not taught. Yet will I tell you what if\nyou will do, you will do well. Count not that wealth which is stored\nup--in what is this superior to the sand haphazard heaped? nor that\nwhich comes from men who groan beneath taxation's heavy weight--for gold\nthat comes from tears is base and black. You'll use wealth best of any\nking, if you supply the needs of those in want and make their wealth\nsecure for those with many goods. Be fearful of the power to do whate'er\nyou please, so will you use it with more prudence. Do not lop off the\nears of corn that show beyond the rest and raise their heads--for\nAristotle is not just in this[116]--but rather weed their disaffection\nout like tares from corn, and show yourself a fear to stirrers up of\nstrife not in 'I punish you' but in 'I _will_ do so.' Submit yourself to\nlaw, O prince, for you will make the laws with greater wisdom if you do\nnot despise the law yourself. Pay reverence more than ever to the Gods;\ngreat are the gifts you have received from them, and for great things\nyou pray.[117] In what concerns the state act as a king; in what\nconcerns yourself, act as a private man\" (v. 36). And so on much in the\nsame strain, all good advice and showing a deep knowledge of human\naffairs. And if we are to suppose that this is merely a rhetorical\nexercise of Philostratus and not based on the substance of what\nApollonius said, then we must have a higher opinion of the rhetorician\nthan the rest of his writings warrant.\n\nThere is an exceedingly interesting Socratic dialogue between\nThespesion, the abbot of the Gymnosophist community, and Apollonius on\nthe comparative merits of the Greek and Egyptian ways of representing\nthe Gods. It runs somewhat as follows:\n\n\"What! Are we to think,\" said Thespesion, \"that the Pheidiases and\nPraxiteleses went up to heaven and took impressions of the forms of the\nGods, and so made an art of them, or was it something else that set them\na-modelling?\"\n\n\"Yes, something else,\" said Apollonius, \"something pregnant with\nwisdom.\"\n\n\"What was that? Surely you cannot say it was anything else but\nimitation?\"\n\n\"Imagination wrought them--a workman wiser far than imitation; for\nimitation only makes what it has seen, whereas imagination makes what it\nhas never seen, conceiving it with reference to the thing it really is.\"\n\nImagination, says Apollonius, is one of the most potent faculties, for\nit enables us to reach nearer to realities. It is generally supposed\nthat Greek sculpture was merely a glorification of physical beauty, in\nitself quite unspiritual. It was an idealisation of form and features,\nlimbs and muscles, an empty glorification of the physical with nothing\nof course really corresponding to it in the nature of things. But\nApollonius declared it brings us nearer to the real, as Pythagoras and\nPlato declared before him, and as all the wiser teach. He meant this\nliterally, not vaguely and fantastically. He asserted that the types and\nideas of things are the only realities. He meant that between the\nimperfection of the earth and the highest divine type of all things,\nwere grades of increasing perfection. He meant that within each man was\na form of perfection, though of course not yet absolutely perfect. That\nthe angel in man, his d\u00e6mon, was of God-like beauty, the summation of\nall the finest features he had ever worn in his many lives on earth. The\nGods, too, belonged to the world of types, of models, of perfections,\nthe heaven-world. The Greek sculptors had succeeded in getting in\ncontact with this world, and the faculty they used was imagination.\n\nThis idealisation of form was a worthy way to represent the Gods; but,\nsays Apollonius, if you set up a hawk or owl or dog in your temples, to\nrepresent Hermes or Athena or Apollo, you may dignify the animals, but\nyou make the Gods lose dignity.\n\nTo this Thespesion replies that the Egyptians dare not give any precise\nform to the Gods; they give them merely symbols to which an occult\nmeaning is attached.\n\nYes, answers Apollonius, but the danger is that the common people\nworship these symbols and get unbeautiful ideas of the Gods. The best\nthing would be to have no representations at all. For the mind of the\nworshipper can form and fashion for himself an image of the object of\nhis worship better than any art.\n\nQuite so, retorted Thespesion, and then added mischievously: There was\nan old Athenian, by-the-by--no fool--called Socrates, who swore by the\ndog and goose as though they were Gods.\n\nYes, replied Apollonius, he was no fool. He swore by them not as being\nGods, but in order that he might not swear by the Gods (iv. 19).\n\nThis is a pleasant passage of wit, of Egyptian against Greek, but all\nsuch set arguments must be set down to the rhetorical exercises of\nPhilostratus rather than to Apollonius, who taught as \"one having\nauthority,\" as \"from a tripod.\" Apollonius, a priest of universal\nreligion, might have pointed out the good side and the bad side of both\nGreek and Egyptian religious art, and certainly taught the higher way of\nsymbolless worship, but he would not champion one popular cult against\nanother. In the above speech there is a distinct prejudice against Egypt\nand a glorification of Greece, and this occurs in a very marked fashion\nin several other speeches. Philostratus was a champion of Greece against\nall comers; but Apollonius, we believe, was wiser than his biographer.\n\nIn spite of the artificial literary dress that is given to the longer\ndiscourses of Apollonius, they contain many noble thoughts, as we may\nsee from the following quotations from the conversations of our\nphilosopher with his friend Demetrius, who was endeavouring to dissuade\nhim from braving Domitian at Rome.\n\nThe law, said Apollonius, obliges us to die for liberty, and nature\nordains that we should die for our parents, our friends, or our\nchildren. All men are bound by these duties. But a higher duty is laid\nupon the sage; he must die for his principles and the truth he holds\ndearer than life. It is not the law that lays this choice upon him, it\nis not nature; it is the strength and courage of his own soul. Though\nfire or sword threaten him, it will not overcome his resolution or force\nfrom him the slightest falsehood; but he will guard the secrets of\nothers' lives and all that has been entrusted to his honour as\nreligiously as the secrets of initiation. And I know more than other\nmen, for I know that of all that I know, I know some things for the\ngood, some for the wise, some for myself, some for the Gods, but naught\nfor tyrants.\n\nAgain, I think that a wise man does nothing alone or by himself; no\nthought of his so secret but that he has himself as witness to it. And\nwhether the famous saying \"know thyself\" be from Apollo or from some\nsage who learnt to know himself and proclaimed it as a good for all, I\nthink the wise man who knows himself and has his own spirit in constant\ncomradeship, to fight at his right hand, will neither cringe at what the\nvulgar fear, nor dare to do what most men do without the slightest shame\n(vii. 15).\n\nIn the above we have the true philosopher's contempt for death, and also\nthe calm knowledge of the initiate, of the comforter and adviser of\nothers to whom the secrets of their lives have been confessed, that no\ntortures can ever unseal his lips. Here, too, we have the full knowledge\nof what consciousness is, of the impossibility of hiding the smallest\ntrace of evil in the inner world; and also the dazzling brilliancy of a\nhigher ethic which makes the habitual conduct of the crowd appear\nsurprising--the \"that which they do--not with shame.\"\n\n\n\n\nSECTION XVI.\n\nFROM HIS LETTERS.\n\n\nApollonius seems to have written many letters to emperors, kings,\nphilosophers, communities and states, although he was by no means a\n\"voluminous correspondent\"; in fact, the style of his short notes is\nexceedingly concise, and they were composed, as Philostratus says,\n\"after the manner of the Laced\u00e6monian scytale\"[118] (iv. 27 and vii.\n35).\n\nIt is evident that Philostratus had access to letters attributed to\nApollonius, for he quotes a number of them,[119] and there seems no\nreason to doubt their authenticity. Whence he obtained them he does not\ninform us, unless it be that they were the collection made by Hadrian at\nAntium (viii. 20).\n\nThat the reader may be able to judge of the style of Apollonius we\nappend one or two specimens of these letters, or rather notes, for they\nare too short to deserve the title of epistles. Here is one to the\nmagistrates of Sparta:\n\n\"Apollonius to the Ephors, greeting!\n\n\"It is possible for men not to make mistakes, but it requires noble men\nto acknowledge they have made them.\"\n\nAll of which Apollonius gets into just half as many words in Greek.\nHere, again, is an interchange of notes between the two greatest\nphilosophers of the time, both of whom suffered imprisonment and were in\nconstant danger of death.\n\n\"Apollonius to Musonius, the philosopher, greeting!\n\n\"I want to go to you, to share speech and roof with you, to be of some\nservice to you. If you still believe that Hercules once rescued Theseus\nfrom Hades, write what you would have. Farewell!\"\n\n\"Musonius to Apollonius, the philosopher, greeting!\n\n\"Good merit shall be stored for you for your good thoughts; what is in\nstore for me is one who waits his trial and proves his innocence.\nFarewell.\"\n\n\"Apollonius to Musonius, greeting!\n\n\"Socrates refused to be got out of prison by his friends and went before\nthe judges. He was put to death. Farewell.\"\n\n\"Musonius to Apollonius, the philosopher, greeting!\n\n\"Socrates was put to death because he made no preparation for his\ndefence. I shall do so. Farewell!\"\n\nHowever, Musonius, the Stoic, was sent to penal servitude by Nero.\n\nHere is a note to the Cynic Demetrius, another of our philosopher's most\ndevoted friends.\n\n\"Apollonius, the philosopher, to Demetrius, the Dog,[120] greeting!\n\n\"I give thee to Titus, the emperor, to teach him the way of kingship,\nand do you in turn give me to speak him true; and be to him all things\nbut anger. Farewell!\"\n\nIn addition to the notes quoted in the text of Philostratus, there is a\ncollection of ninety-five letters, mostly brief notes, the text of which\nis printed in most editions.[121] Nearly all the critics are of opinion\nthat they are not genuine, but Jowett[122] and others think that some of\nthem may very well be genuine.\n\nHere is a specimen or two of these letters. Writing to Euphrates, his\ngreat enemy, that is to say the champion of pure rationalistic ethic\nagainst the science of sacred things, he says:\n\n17. \"The Persians call those who have the divine faculty (or are\ngod-like) Magi. A Magus, then, is one who is a minister of the Gods, or\none who has by nature the god-like faculty. You are no Magus but reject\nthe Gods (i.e., are an atheist).\"\n\nAgain, in a letter addressed to Criton, we read:\n\n23. \"Pythagoras said that the most divine art was that of healing. And\nif the healing art is most divine, it must occupy itself with the soul\nas well as with the body; for no creature can be sound so long as the\nhigher part in it is sickly.\"\n\nWriting to the priests of Delphi against the practice of\nblood-sacrifice, he says:\n\n27. \"Heraclitus was a sage, but even he[123] never advised the people of\nEphesus to wash out mud with mud.\"[124]\n\nAgain, to some who claimed to be his followers, those \"who think\nthemselves wise,\" he writes the reproof:\n\n43. \"If any say he is my disciple, then let him add he keeps himself\napart out of the Baths, he slays no living thing, eats of no flesh, is\nfree from envy, malice, hatred, calumny, and hostile feelings, but has\nhis name inscribed among the race of those who've won their freedom.\"\n\nAmong these letters is found one of some length addressed to Valerius,\nprobably P. Valerius Asiaticus, consul in A.D. 70. It is a wise letter\nof philosophic consolation to enable Valerius to bear the loss of his\nson, and runs as follows:[125]\n\n\"There is no death of anyone, but only in appearance, even as there is\nno birth of any, save only in seeming. The change from being to becoming\nseems to be birth, and the change from becoming to being seems to be\ndeath, but in reality no one is ever born, nor does one ever die. It is\nsimply a being visible and then invisible; the former through the\ndensity of matter, and the latter because of the subtlety of\nbeing--being which is ever the same, its only change being motion and\nrest. For being has this necessary peculiarity, that its change is\nbrought about by nothing external to itself; but whole becomes parts and\nparts become whole in the oneness of the all. And if it be asked: What\nis this which sometimes is seen and sometimes not seen, now in the same,\nnow in the different?--it might be answered: It is the way of everything\nhere in the world below that when it is filled out with matter it is\nvisible, owing to the resistance of its density, but is invisible, owing\nto its subtlety, when it is rid of matter, though matter still surround\nit and flow through it in that immensity of space which hems it in but\nknows no birth or death.\n\n\"But why has this false notion [of birth and death] remained so long\nwithout a refutation? Some think that what has happened through them,\nthey have themselves brought about. They are ignorant that the\nindividual is brought to birth _through_ parents, not by parents, just\nas a thing produced _through_ the earth is not produced _from_ it. The\nchange which comes to the individual is nothing that is caused by his\nvisible surroundings, but rather a change in the one thing which is in\nevery individual.\n\n\"And what other name can we give to it but primal being? 'Tis it alone\nthat acts and suffers becoming all for all through all, eternal deity,\ndeprived and wronged of its own self by names and forms. But this is a\nless serious thing than that a man should be bewailed, when he has\npassed from man to God by change of state and not by the destruction of\nhis nature. The fact is that so far from mourning death you ought to\nhonour it and reverence it. The best and fittest way for you to honour\ndeath is now to leave the one who's gone to God, and set to work to play\nthe ruler over those left in your charge as you were wont to do. It\nwould be a disgrace for such a man as you to owe your cure to time and\nnot to reason, for time makes even common people cease from grief. The\ngreatest thing is a strong rule, and of the greatest rulers he is best\nwho first can rule himself. And how is it permissible to wish to change\nwhat has been brought to pass by will of God? If there's a law in\nthings, and there _is_ one, and it is God who has appointed it, the\nrighteous man will have no wish to try to change good things, for such a\nwish is selfishness, and counter to the law, but he will think that all\nthat comes to pass is a good thing. On! heal yourself, give justice to\nthe wretched and console them; so shall you dry your tears. You should\nnot set your private woes above your public cares, but rather set your\npublic cares before your private woes. And see as well what consolation\nyou already have! The nation sorrows with you for your son. Make some\nreturn to those who weep with you; and this you will more quickly do if\nyou will cease from tears than if you still persist. Have you not\nfriends? Why! you have yet another son. Have you not even still the one\nthat's gone? You have!--will answer anyone who really thinks. For 'that\nwhich is' doth cease not--nay _is_ just for the very fact that it will\nbe for aye; or else the 'is not' is, and how could that be when the 'is'\ndoth never cease to be?\n\n\"Again it will be said you fail in piety to God and are unjust. 'Tis\ntrue. You fail in piety to God, you fail in justice to your boy; nay\nmore, you fail in piety to him as well. Would'st know what death is?\nThen make me dead and send me off to company with death, and if you will\nnot change the dress you've put on it,[126] you will have straightway\nmade me better than yourself.\"[127]\n\n\n\n\nSECTION XVII.\n\nTHE WRITINGS OF APOLLONIUS.\n\n\nBut besides these letters Apollonius also wrote a number of treatises,\nof which, however, only one or two fragments have been preserved. These\ntreatises are as follows:\n\n_a._ The Mystic Rites or Concerning Sacrifices.[128] This treatise is\nmentioned by Philostratus (iii. 41; iv. 19), who tells us that it set\ndown the proper method of sacrifice to every God, the proper hours of\nprayer and offering. It was in wide circulation, and Philostratus had\ncome across copies of it in many temples and cities, and in the\nlibraries of philosophers. Several fragments of it have been\npreserved,[129] the most important of which is to be found in\nEusebius,[130] and is to this effect: \"'Tis best to make no sacrifice to\nGod at all, no lighting of a fire, no calling Him by any name that men\nemploy for things of sense. For God is over all, the first; and only\nafter Him do come the other Gods. For He doth stand in need of naught\ne'en from the Gods, much less from us small men--naught that the earth\nbrings forth, nor any life she nurseth, or even any thing the stainless\nair contains. The only fitting sacrifice to God is man's best reason,\nand not the word[131] that comes from out his mouth.\n\n\"We men should ask the best of beings through the best thing in us, for\nwhat is good--I mean by means of mind, for mind needs no material things\nto make its prayer. So then, to God, the mighty One, who's over all, no\nsacrifice should ever be lit up.\"\n\nNoack[132] tells us that scholarship is convinced of the genuineness of\nthis fragment. This book, as we have seen, was widely circulated and\nheld in the highest respect, and it said that its rules were engraved on\nbrazen pillars at Byzantium.[133]\n\n_b._ The Oracles or Concerning Divination, 4 books. Philostratus (iii.\n41) seems to think that the full title was Divination of the Stars, and\nsays that it was based on what Apollonius had learned in India; but the\n_kind_ of divination Apollonius wrote about was not the ordinary\nastrology, but something which Philostratus considers superior to\nordinary human art in such matters. He had, however, never heard of\nanyone possessing a copy of this rare work.\n\n_c._ The Life of Pythagoras. Porphyry refers to this work,[134] and\nIamblichus quotes a long passage from it.[135]\n\n_d._ The Will of Apollonius, to which reference has already been made,\nin treating of the sources of Philostratus (i. 3). This was written in\nthe Ionic dialect, and contained a summary of his doctrines.\n\nA Hymn to Memory is also ascribed to him, and Eudocia speaks of many\nother ([Greek: kai alla polla]) works.\n\nWe have now indicated for the reader all the information which exists\nconcerning our philosopher. Was Apollonius, then, a rogue, a trickster,\na charlatan, a fanatic, a misguided enthusiast, or a philosopher, a\nreformer, a conscious worker, a true initiate, one of the earth's great\nones? This each must decide for himself, according to his knowledge or\nhis ignorance.\n\nI for my part bless his memory, and would gladly learn from him, as now\nhe is.\n\n\n\n\nSECTION XVIII.\n\nBIBLIOGRAPHICAL NOTES.\n\n\nNINETEENTH CENTURY LITERATURE ON APOLLONIUS.\n\n  Jacobs (F.), Observationes in ... Philostrati Vitam Apollonii\n  (Jena; 1804), purely philological, for the correction of the\n  text.\n\n  Legrand d'Aussy (P. J. B.), Vie d'Apollonius de Tyane (Paris;\n  1807, 2 vols.).\n\n  Bekker (G. J.), Specimen Variarum Lectionum ... in Philost.\n  Vit\u00e6 App. Librum primum (1808); purely philological.\n\n  Berwick (E.), The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, translated from\n  the Greek of Philostratus, with Notes and Illustrations\n  (London; 1809).\n\n  Lancetti (V.), Le Opere dei due Filostrati, Italian trs.\n  (Milano; 1828-31); in \"Coll. degli Ant. Storici Greci\n  volgarizzati.\"\n\n  Jacobs (F.), Philostratus: Leben des Apollonius von Tyana, in\n  the series \"Griechische Prosaiker,\" German trs. (Stuttgart;\n  1829-32), vols. xlviii., lxvi., cvi., cxi., each containing two\n  books; a very clumsy arrangement.\n\n  Baur (F. C.), Apollonius von Tyana und Christus oder das\n  Verh\u00e4ltniss des Pythagoreismus zum Christenthum (T\u00fcbingen;\n  1832); reprinted from T\u00fcbinger Zeitschrift f\u00fcr Theologie.\n\n  Second edition by E. Zeller (Leipzig; 1876), in Drei\n  Abhandlungen zur Geschichte der alten Philosophie und ihres\n  Verh\u00e4ltnisses zum Christenthum.\n\n  Kayser and Westermann's editions as above referred to in\n  section v.\n\n  Newman (J. H.), \"Apollonius Tyan\u00e6us--Miracles,\" in Smedley's\n  Encyclop\u00e6dia Metropolitana (London; 1845), x. pp. 619-644.\n\n  Noack (L.), \"Apollonius von Tyana ein Christusbild des\n  Heidenthums,\" in his magazine Psyche: Popul\u00e4rwissenschaftliche\n  Zeitschrift f\u00fcr die Kentniss des menschlichen Seelen- und\n  Geistes-lebens (Leipzig; 1858), Bd. i., Heft ii., pp. 1-24.\n\n  M\u00fcller (I. P. E.), Commentatio qua de Philostrati in componenda\n  Memoria Apoll. Tyan. fide qu\u00e6ritur, I.-III. (Onoldi et\n  Landavii; 1858-1860).\n\n  M\u00fcller (E.), War Apollonius von Tyana ein Weiser oder ein\n  Betr\u00fcger oder ein Schw\u00e4rmer und Fanatiker? Ein\n  Culturhistorische Untersuchung (Breslau; 1861, 4to), 56 pp.\n\n  Chassang (A.), Apollonius de Tyane, sa Vie, ses Voyages, ses\n  Prodiges, par Philostrate, et ses Lettres, trad. du grec. avec\n  Introd., Notes et Eclaircissements (Paris; 1862), with the\n  additional title, Le Merveilleux dans l'Antiquit\u00e9.\n\n  R\u00e9ville (A.), Apollonius the Pagan Christ of the Third Century\n  (London; 1866), tr. from the French. The original is not in the\n  British Museum.\n\n  Priaulx (O. de B.), The Indian Travels of Apollonius of Tyana,\n  etc. (London; 1873), pp. 1-62.\n\n  M\u00f6nckeberg (C.), Apollonius von Tyana, ein Weihnachtsgabe\n  (Hamburg; 1877), 57 pp.\n\n  Pettersch (C. H.), Apollonius von Tyana der Heiden Heiland, ein\n  philosophische Studie (Reichenberg; 1879), 23 pp.\n\n  Nielsen (C. L.), Apollonios fra Tyana og Filostrats Beskrivelse\n  af hans Levnet (Copenhagen; 1879); the Appendix (pp. 167 sqq.)\n  contains a Danish tr. of Eusebius Contra Hieroclem.\n\n  Baltzer (E.), Apollonius von Tyana, aus den Griech. \u00fcbersetzt\n  u. erl\u00e4utert (Rudolstadt i/ Th.; 1883).\n\n  Jessen (J.), Apollonius von Tyana und sein Biograph\n  Philostratus (Hamburg; 1885, 4to), 36 pp.\n\n  Tredwell (D. M.), A Sketch of the Life of Apollonius of Tyana,\n  or the first Ten Decades of our Era (New York; 1886).\n\n  Sinnett (A. P.), \"Apollonius of Tyana,\" in the Transactions\n  (No. 32) of the London Lodge of the Theosophical Society\n  (London; 1898), 32 pp.\n\n  The student may also consult the articles in the usual\n  Dictionaries and Encyclop\u00e6dias, none of which, however, demand\n  special mention. P. Cassel's learned paper in the Vossische\n  Zeitung of Nov. 24th, 1878, I have not been able to see.\n\n\nSOME INDICATIONS OF THE LITERATURE ON THE RELIGIOUS ASSOCIATIONS AMONG\nTHE GREEKS AND ROMANS.\n\n  B\u00f6ckh (A.), Die Staatshaushaltung der Athener (1st ed. 1817).\n  For older literature, see i. 416, _n._\n\n  Van Holst, De Eranis Veterum Gr\u00e6corum (Leyden; 1832).\n\n  Mommsen (T.), De Collegiis et Sodaliciis Romanorum (Kiel;\n  1843).\n\n  Mommsen (T.), \"R\u00f6mische Urkunden, iv.--Die Lex Julia de Collegiis\n  und die lanuvinische Lex Collegii Salutaris,\" art. in Zeitschr.\n  f\u00fcr geschichtl. Rechtswissenschaft (1850), vol. xv. 353 sqq.\n\n  Wescher (C.), \"Recherches \u00e9pigraphiques en Gr\u00e8ce, dans\n  l'Archipel et en Asie Mineure,\" arts. in Le Moniteur of Oct.\n  20, 23, and 24, 1863.\n\n  Wescher (C.), \"Inscriptions de l'\u00cele de Rhodes relatives \u00e0 des\n  Soci\u00e9t\u00e9s religieuses\"; \"Notice sur deux Inscriptions de l'\u00cele\n  de Th\u00e9ra relatives \u00e0 une Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 religieuse\"; \"Note sur une\n  Inscription de l'\u00cele de Th\u00e9ra publi\u00e9e par M. Ross et relative \u00e0\n  une Soci\u00e9t\u00e9 religieuse\"; arts. in La Revue arch\u00e9ologique\n  (Paris; new series, 1864), x. 460 sqq.; 1865, xii. 214 sqq.;\n  1866, xiii. 245 sqq.\n\n  Foucart (P.), Des Associations religieuses chez les Grecs,\n  Thiases, \u00c9ranes, Org\u00e9ons, avec le Texte des Inscriptions\n  relatives \u00e0 ces Associations (Paris; 1873).\n\n  L\u00fcders (H. O.), Die dionyschischen K\u00fcnstler (Berlin; 1873).\n\n  Cohn (M.), Zum r\u00f6mischen Vereinsrecht: Abhandlung aus der\n  Rechtsgeschichte (Berlin; 1873). Also the notice of it in\n  Bursian's Philol. Jaresbericht (1873), ii. 238-304.\n\n  Henzen (G.), Acta Fratrum Arvalium qu\u00e6 supersunt;... accedunt\n  Fragmenta Fastorum in Luco Arvalium effossa (Berlin; 1874).\n\n  Heinrici (G.), \"Die Christengemeinde Korinths und die\n  religi\u00f6sen genossenschaften der Griechen\"; \"Zur Geschichte der\n  Anfange paulinischer Gemeinden\"; arts. in Zeitschr. f\u00fcr\n  wissensch. Theol. (Jena, etc.; 1876), pp. 465-526, particularly\n  pp. 479 sqq.; 1877, pp. 89-130.\n\n  Duruy (V.), \"Du R\u00e9gime municipal dans l'Empire romain,\" art. in\n  La Revue historique (Paris; 1876), pp. 355 sqq.; also his\n  Histoire des Romanis (Paris; 1843, 1844), i. 149 sqq.\n\n  De Rossi, Roma Sotteranea (Rome; 1877), iii. 37 sqq., and\n  especially pp. 507 sqq.\n\n  Marquardt (J.), R\u00f6mische Staatsverwaltung, iii. 131-142, in\n  vol. vi. of Marquardt and Mommsen's Handbuch der r\u00f6mischen\n  Altherth\u00fcmer (Leipzig; 1878); an excellent summary with\n  valuable notes, especially the section \"Ersatz der Gentes durch\n  die Sodalitates f\u00fcr fremde Culte.\"\n\n  Boissier (G.), La Religion romaine d'Auguste aux Antonins\n  (Paris; 2nd ed. 1878), ii. 238-304 (1st ed. 1874).\n\n  Hatch (E.), The Organization of the Early Christian Churches:\n  The Bampton Lectures for 1880 (London; 2nd ed. 1882); see\n  especially Lecture ii., \"Bishops and Deacons,\" pp. 26-32:\n  German ed. Die Gesellschaftsverfassung der christlichen Kirchen\n  in Althertum (1883), p. 20; see this for additional literature.\n\n  Newmann (K. J.), \"[Greek: thias\u00f4tai I\u00easou],\" art. in Jahrbb.\n  f\u00fcr prot. Theol. (Leipzig, etc.; 1885), pp. 123-125.\n\n  Sch\u00fcrer (E.), A History of the Jewish People in the Time of\n  Jesus Christ, Eng. tr. (Edinburgh; 1893), Div. ii, vol. ii. pp.\n  255 and 300.\n\n  Owen (J.), \"On the Organization of the Early Church,\" an\n  Introductory Essay to the English translation of Harnack's\n  Sources of the Apostolic Canons (London; 1895).\n\n  Anst (E.), Die Religion der R\u00f6mer; vol. xiii. Darstellungen aus\n  dem Gebiete der nichtchristlichen Religionsgeschichte (M\u00fcnster\n  i. W.; 1899).\n\nSee also Whiston and Wayte's art. \"Arvales Fratres,\" and Moyle's arts.\n\"Collegium\" and \"Universitas,\" in Smith, Wayte and Marindin's Dict. of\nGreek and Roman Antiquities (London; 3rd ed. 1890-1891); and also, of\ncourse, the arts. \"Collegium\" and \"Sodalitas\" in Pauly's\nRealencyclop\u00e4die der classichen Alterthumswissenschaft, though they are\nnow somewhat out of date.\n\n\n  FOOTNOTES:\n\n  [1] From a fragment of The Cretans. See Lobeck's Aglaophamus,\n  p. 622.\n\n  [2] Pronounced T\u00fd[)a]na, with the accent on the first syllable\n  and the first a short.\n\n  [3] Alexander sive Pseudomantis, vi.\n\n  [4] De Magia, xc. (ed. Hildebrand, 1842, ii. 614).\n\n  [5] [Greek: telesmata]. _Telesma_ was \"a consecrated object,\n  turned by the Arabs into _telsam_ (_talisman_)\"; see Liddell and\n  Scott's Lexicon, sub voc.\n\n  [6] Justin Martyr, Opera, ed. Otto (2nd ed.; Jena, 1849), iii.\n  32.\n\n  [7] Lib. lxxvii. 18.\n\n  [8] Life of Alexander Severus, xxix.\n\n  [9] Life of Aurelian, xxiv.\n\n  [10] \"_Qu\u00e6 qui velit nosse, gr\u00e6cos legat libros qui de ejus\n  vita conscripti sunt._\" These accounts were probably the books\n  of Maximus, Moeragenes, and Philostratus.\n\n  [11] An Egyptian epic poet, who wrote several poetical\n  histories in Greek; he flourished in the last decade of the\n  third century.\n\n  [12] Sidonius Apollinaris, Epp., viii. 3. See also Legrand\n  d'Aussy, Vie d'Apollonius de Tyane (Paris; 1807), p. xlvii.\n\n  [13] Porphyry, De Vita Pythagor\u00e6, section ii., ed. Kiessling\n  (Leipzig; 1816). Iamblichus De Vita Pythagorica, chap. xxv.,\n  ed. Kiessling (Leipzig; 1813); see especially K.'s note, pp. 11\n  sqq. See also Porphyry, Frag., De Styge, p. 285, ed. Holst.\n\n  [14] See Duchesne on the recently discovered works of Macarius\n  Magnes (Paris; 1877).\n\n  [15] The most convenient text is by Gaisford (Oxford; 1852),\n  Eusebii Pamphili contra Hieroclem; it is also printed in a\n  number of editions of Philostratus. There are two translations\n  in Latin, one in Italian, one in Danish, all bound up with\n  Philostratus' Vita, and one in French printed apart (Discours\n  d'Eus\u00e8be Ev\u00eaque de Cesar\u00e9e touchant les Miracles attribuez par\n  les Payens \u00e0 Apollonius de Tyane, tr. by Cousin. Paris; 1584,\n  12mo, 135 pp.).\n\n  [16] Lactantius, Divin\u00e6 Institutiones, v. 2, 3; ed. Fritsche\n  (Leipzig; 1842), pp. 233, 236.\n\n  [17] Arnobius, Adversus Nationes, i. 52; ed. Hildebrand (Halle;\n  1844), p. 86. The Church Father, however, with that\n  exclusiveness peculiar to the Jud\u00e6o-Christian view, omits Moses\n  from the list of Magi.\n\n  [18] John Chrysostom, Adversus Jud\u00e6os, v. 3 (p. 631); De\n  Laudibus Sancti Pauli Apost. Homil., iv. (p. 493 D.; ed.\n  Montfauc.).\n\n  [19] Hieronymus, Ep. ad Paulinum, 53 (text ap. Kayser, pr\u00e6f.\n  ix.).\n\n  [20] August., Epp., cxxxviii. Text quoted by Legrand d'Aussy,\n  op. cit., p. 294.\n\n  [21] Isidorus Pelusiota, Epp., p. 138; ed. J. Billius (Paris;\n  1585).\n\n  [22] See Arnobius, loc. cit.\n\n  [23] Sidonius Apollinaris, Epp., viii. 3. Also Fabricius,\n  Bibliotheca Gr\u00e6ca, pp. 549, 565 (ed. Harles). The work of\n  Sidonius on Apollonius is unfortunately lost.\n\n  [24] _Amplissimus ille philosophus_ (xxiii. 7). See also xxi.\n  14; xxiii. 19.\n\n  [25] [Greek: ti the\u00f4n te kai anthr\u00f4pou meson], meaning thereby\n  presumably one who has reached the grade of being superior to\n  man, but not yet equal to the gods. This was called by the\n  Greeks the \"d\u00e6monian\" order. But the word \"d\u00e6mon,\" owing to\n  sectarian bitterness, has long been degraded from its former\n  high estate, and the original idea is now signified in popular\n  language by the term \"angel.\" Compare Plato, Symposium, xxiii.,\n  [Greek: pan to daimonion metaxy esti theou te kai thn\u00eatou],\n  \"all that is d\u00e6monian is between God and man.\"\n\n  [26] Eunapius, Vit\u00e6 Philosophorum, Prooemium, vi.; ed.\n  Boissonade (Amsterdam; 1822), p. 3.\n\n  [27] R\u00e9ville, Apollonius of Tyana (tr. from the French), p. 56\n  (London; 1866). I have, however, not been able to discover on\n  what authority this statement is made.\n\n  [28] _Insignis philosophus_; see his Chronicon, written down to\n  the year 519.\n\n  [29] In his Chronographia. See Legrand d'Aussy, op. cit., p.\n  313.\n\n  [30] Chiliades, ii. 60.\n\n  [31] Cited by Legrand d'Aussy, op. cit., p. 286.\n\n  [32] [Greek: philosophos Pythagoreios stoichei\u00f4matikos]--Cedrenus,\n  Compendium Historiarium, i. 346; ed. Bekker. The word which\n  I have rendered by \"adept\" signifies one \"who has power over the\n  elements.\"\n\n  [33] Legrand d'Aussy, op. cit., p. 308.\n\n  [34] If we except the disputed Letters and a few quotations\n  from one of Apollonius' lost writings.\n\n  [35] Philostratus de Vita Apollonii Tyanei Libri Octo, tr. by\n  A. Rinuccinus, and Eusebius contra Hieroclem, tr. by Z.\n  Acciolus (Venice; 1501-04, fol.). Rinucci's translation was\n  improved by Beroaldus and printed at Lyons (1504?), and again\n  at Cologne, 1534.\n\n  [36] F. Baldelli, Filostrato Lemnio della Vita di Apollonio\n  Tianeo (Florence; 1549, 8vo).\n\n  [37] B. de Vign\u00e8re, Philostrate de la Vie d'Apollonius (Paris;\n  1596, 1599, 1611). Blaise de Vign\u00e8re's translation was\n  subsequently corrected by Fr\u00e9d\u00e9ric Morel and later by Thomas\n  Artus, Sieur d'Embry, with bombastic notes in which he bitterly\n  attacks the wonder-workings of Apollonius. A French translation\n  was also made by Th. Sibilet about 1560, but never published;\n  the MS. was in the Biblioth\u00e8que Imperiale. See Miller, Journal\n  des Savants, 1849, p. 625, quoted by Chassang, op. infr. cit.,\n  p. iv.\n\n  [38] F. Morellus, Philostrati Lemnii Opera, Gr. and Lat.\n  (Paris; 1608).\n\n  [39] G. Olearius, Philostratorum qu\u00e6 supersunt Omnia, Gr. and\n  Lat. (Leipzig; 1709).\n\n  [40] C. L. Kayser, Flavii Philostrati qu\u00e6 supersunt, etc.\n  (Zurich; 1844, 4to). In 1849 A. Westermann also edited a text,\n  Philostratorum et Callistrati Opera, in Didot's \"Scriptorum\n  Gr\u00e6corum Bibliotheca\" (Paris; 1849, 8vo). But Kayser brought\n  out a new edition in 1853 (?), and again a third, with\n  additional information in the Preface, in the \"Bibliotheca\n  Teubneriana\" (Leipzig; 1870).\n\n  [41] For a general summary of opinions prior to 1807, of\n  writers who mention Apollonius incidentally, see Legrand\n  d'Aussy, op. cit., ii. pp. 313-327.\n\n  [42] L'Histoire d'Apollone de Tyane convaincue de Fausset\u00e9 et\n  d'Imposture (Paris; 1705).\n\n  [43] An Account of the Life of Apollonius Tyaneus (London;\n  1702), tr. out of the French, from vol. ii. of Lenain de\n  Tillemont's Histoire des Empereurs (2nd ed., Paris; 1720): to\n  which is added Some Observations upon Apollonius. De\n  Tillemont's view is that Apollonius was sent by the Devil to\n  destroy the work of the Saviour.\n\n  [44] A Critical and Historical Discourse upon the Method of the\n  Principal Authors who wrote for and against Christianity from\n  its Beginning (London; 1739), tr. from the French of M. l'Abb\u00e9\n  Houtteville; to which is added a \"Dessertation on the Life of\n  Apollonius Tyan\u00e6us, with some Observations on the Platonists of\n  the Latter School,\" pp. 213-254.\n\n  [45] Anti-Hierocles oder Jesus Christus und Apollonius von\n  Tyana in ihrer grossen Ungleichheit, dargestellt v. J. B.\n  L\u00fcderwald (Halle; 1793).\n\n  [46] Phileleutherus Helvetius, De Miraculis qu\u00e6 Pythagor\u00e6,\n  Apollonio Tyanensi, Francisco Asisio, Dominico, et Ignatio\n  Lojol\u00e6 tribuuntur Libellus (Draci; 1734).\n\n  [47] See Legrand d'Aussy, op. cit., ii. p. 314, where the texts\n  are given.\n\n  [48] The Two First Books of Philostratus concerning the Life of\n  Apollonius Tyaneus (London; 1680, fol.). Blount's notes\n  (generally ascribed to Lord Herbert) raised such an outcry that\n  the book was condemned in 1693, and few copies are in\n  existence. Blount's notes were, however, translated into French\n  a century later, in the days of Encyclop\u00e6dism, and appended to\n  a French version of the Vita, under the title, Vie d'Apollonius\n  de Tyane par Philostrate avec les Commentaires donn\u00e9s en\n  Anglois par Charles Blount sur les deux Premiers Livres de cet\n  Ouvrage (Amsterdam; 1779, 4 vols., 8vo), with an ironical\n  dedication to Pope Clement XIV., signed \"Philalethes.\"\n\n  [49] Philosophiam Practicam Apollonii Tyan\u00e6i in Sciagraphia,\n  exponit M. Io. Christianus Herzog (Leipzig; 1709); an\n  academical oration of 20 pp.\n\n  [50] Philostratus is a difficult author to translate,\n  nevertheless Chassang and Baltzer have succeeded very well with\n  him; Berwick also is readable, but in most places gives us a\n  paraphrase rather than a translation and frequently mistakes\n  the meaning. Chassang's and Baltzer's are by far the best\n  translations.\n\n  [51] This would have at least restored Apollonius to his\n  natural environment, and confined the question of the divinity\n  of Jesus to its proper Jud\u00e6o-Christian ground.\n\n  [52] I am unable to offer any opinion on Nielsen's book, from\n  ignorance of Danish, but it has all the appearance of a\n  careful, scholarly treatise with abundance of references.\n\n  [53] R\u00e9ville's Pagan Christ is quite a misrepresentation of the\n  subject, and Newman's treatment of the matter renders his\n  treatise an anachronism for the twentieth century.\n\n  [54] Consisting of eight books written in Greek under the\n  general title [Greek: Ta es ton Tyanea Apoll\u00f4nion].\n\n  [55] [Greek: h\u00ea philosophos], see art. \"Philostratus\" in\n  Smith's Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Biog. (London; 1870), iii.\n  327_b._\n\n  [56] The italics are Gibbon's.\n\n  [57] More correctly Domna Julia; Domna being not a shortened\n  form of Domina, but the Syrian name of the empress.\n\n  [58] She died A.D. 217.\n\n  [59] The contrary is held by other historians.\n\n  [60] Gibbon's Decline and Fall, I. vi\n\n  [61] I use the 1846 and 1870 editions of Kayser's text\n  throughout.\n\n  [62] A collection of these letters (but not all of them) had\n  been in the possession of the Emperor Hadrian (A.D. 117-138),\n  and had been left in his palace at Antium (viii. 20). This\n  proves the great fame that Apollonius enjoyed shortly after his\n  disappearance from history, and while he was still a living\n  memory. It is to be noticed that Hadrian was an enlightened\n  ruler, a great traveller, a lover of religion, and an initiate\n  of the Eleusinian Mysteries.\n\n  [63] Nineveh.\n\n  [64] [Greek: tas deltous], writing tablets. This suggests that\n  the account of Damis could not have been very voluminous,\n  although Philostratus further on asserts its detailed nature\n  (i. 19).\n\n  [65] One of the imperial secretaries of the time, who was\n  famous for his eloquence, and tutor to Apollonius.\n\n  [66] A town not far from Tarsus.\n\n  [67] [Greek: h\u00f4s hypotheiaz\u00f4n t\u00ean philosophian egeneto]. The\n  term [Greek: hypotheiaz\u00f4n] occurs only in this passage, and I am\n  therefore not quite certain of its meaning.\n\n  [68] This Life by Moeragenes is casually mentioned by Origenes,\n  Contra Celsum, vi. 41; ed. Lommatzsch (Berlin; 1841), ii. 373.\n\n  [69] [Greek: logois daimoniois].\n\n  [70] Seldom is it that we have such a clear indication, for\n  instance, as in i. 25; \"The following is what _I_ have been\n  able to learn ... about Babylon.\"\n\n  [71] See E. A. Schwanbeck, Megasthenis Indica (Bonn; 1846), and\n  J. W. M'Crindle, Ancient India as described by Megasthenes and\n  Arrian (Calcutta, Bombay, London; 1877), The Commerce and\n  Navigation of the Erythr\u00e6an Sea (1879), Ancient India as\n  described by Ktesias (1882), Ancient India as described by\n  Ptolemy (London; 1885), and The Invasion of India by Alexander\n  the Great (London; 1893, 1896).\n\n  [72] Another good example of this is seen in the disquisition\n  on elephants which Philostratus takes from Juba's History of\n  Libya (ii. 13 and 16).\n\n  [73] Perhaps a title, or the king of the Purus.\n\n  [74] Not that Philostratus makes any disguise of his\n  embellishments; see, for instance, ii. 17, where he says: \"Let\n  me, however, defer what _I_ have to say on the subject of\n  serpents, of the manner of hunting which Damis gives a\n  description.\"\n\n  [75] Legends of the wonderful happenings at his birth were in\n  circulation, and are of the same nature as all such\n  birth-legends of great people.\n\n  [76] [Greek: arr\u00eat\u00f4 tini sophia xynelabe.]\n\n  [77] Sci., than his tutor; namely, the \"memory\" within him, or\n  his \"d\u00e6mon.\"\n\n  [78] This \u00e6ther was presumably the mind-stuff.\n\n  [79] That is to say presumably he was encouraged in his efforts\n  by those unseen helpers of the temple by whom the cures were\n  wrought by means of dreams, and help was given psychically and\n  mesmerically.\n\n  [80] \"Where are you hurrying? Are you off to see the youth?\"\n\n  [81] Compare Odyssey, xx. 18.\n\n  [82] I am inclined to think, however, that Apollonius was still\n  a youngish man when he set out on his Indian travels, instead\n  of being forty-six, as some suppose. But the difficulties of\n  most of the chronology are insurmountable.\n\n  [83] [Greek: ph\u00easas ouk anthr\u00f4p\u00f4n heaut\u00f4 dein, all' andr\u00f4n].\n\n  [84] [Greek: idiotropa].\n\n  [85] [Greek: tous hout\u00f4 philosophountas].\n\n  [86] That is to say, presumably, spend the time in silent\n  meditation.\n\n  [87] That is the Br[=a]hmans and Buddhists. Sarman is the Greek\n  corruption of the Sanskrit Shrama[n.]a and P\u00e2li Sama[n.]o, the\n  technical term for a Buddhist ascetic or monk. The ignorance of\n  the copyists changed Sarmanes first into Germanes and then into\n  Hyrcanians!\n\n  [88] This shows that Apollonius was still young, and not\n  between forty and fifty, as some have asserted. Tredwell (p.\n  77) dates the Indian travels as 41-54 A.D.\n\n  [89] See especially iii. 15, 41; v. 5, 10; vii. 10, 13; viii.\n  28.\n\n  [90] [Greek: ekphatnismata].\n\n  [91] See especially vii. 13, 14, 15, 22, 31.\n\n  [92] The list is full of gaps, so that we cannot suppose that\n  Damis' notes were anything like complete records of the\n  numerous itineraries; not only so, but one is tempted to\n  believe that whole journeys, in which Damis had no share, are\n  omitted.\n\n  [93] Here at any rate they came in sight of the giant\n  mountains, the Imaus (Himavat) or Him[=a]layan Range, where was\n  the great mountain Meros (Meru). The name of the Hindu Olympus\n  being changed into Meros in Greek had, ever since Alexander's\n  expedition, given rise to the myth that Bacchus was born from\n  the thigh (_meros_) of Zeus--presumably one of the facts which\n  led Professor Max M\u00fcller to stigmatise the whole of mythology\n  as a \"disease of language.\"\n\n  [94] Referring to his instructors he says, \"I ever remember my\n  masters and journey through the world teaching what I have\n  learned from them\" (vi. 18).\n\n  [95] According to some, Apollonius would be now about\n  sixty-eight years of age. But if he were still young (say\n  thirty years old or so) when he left for India, he must either\n  have spent a very long period in that country, or we have a\n  very imperfect record of his doings in Asia Minor, Greece,\n  Italy, and Spain, after his return.\n\n  [96] For the most recent study in English on the subject of\n  \u00c6sculapius see The Cult of Asclepios, by Alice Walton, Ph.D.,\n  in No. III. of The Cornell Studies in Classical Philology\n  (Ithaca, N.Y.; 1894).\n\n  [97] He evidently wrote the notes of the Indian travels long\n  after the time at which they were made.\n\n  [98] This shows that Philostratus came across them in some work\n  or letter of Apollonius, and is therefore independent of Damis'\n  account for this particular.\n\n  [99] I--ar[Greek: ch]as, ar[Greek: ch]a(t)s, arhat.\n\n  [100] Tantalus is fabled to have stolen the cup of nectar from\n  the gods; this was the am[r.]ita, the ocean of immortality and\n  wisdom, of the Indians.\n\n  [101] The words [Greek: ouden kekt\u00eamenous \u00ea ta pant\u00f4n], which\n  Philostratus quotes twice in this form, can certainly not be\n  changed into [Greek: m\u00eaden kekt\u00eamenous ta pant\u00f4n echein]\n  without doing unwarrantable violence to their meaning.\n\n  [102] See Tacitus, Historia, ii. 3.\n\n  [103] Berwick, Life of Apollonius, p. 200 _n._\n\n  [104] He also built a precinct round the tomb of Leonidas at\n  Thermopyl\u00e6 (iv. 23).\n\n  [105] A great centre of divination by means of dreams (see ii.\n  37).\n\n  [106] The word [Greek: gymnos] (naked), however, usually means\n  lightly clad, as, for instance, when a man is said to plough\n  \"naked,\" that is with only one garment, and this is evident\n  from the comparison made between the costume of the\n  Gymnosophists and that of people in the hot weather at Athens\n  (vi. 6).\n\n  [107] For they had neither huts nor houses, but lived in the\n  open air.\n\n  [108] He spent, we are told, no less than a year and eight\n  months with Vardan, King of Babylon, and was the honoured guest\n  of the Indian R[=a]j[=a]h \"Phraotes.\"\n\n  [109] See i. 22 (cf. 40), 34; iv. 4, 6, 18 (cf. v. 19), 24, 43;\n  v. 7, 11, 13, 30, 37; vi. 32; viii. 26.\n\n  [110] This expression is, however, perhaps only to be taken as\n  rhetorical, for in viii. 8, the incident is referred to in the\n  simple words \"when he departed ([Greek: ap\u00ealthe]) from the\n  tribunal.\"\n\n  [111] That is to say not in a \"form,\" but in his own nature.\n\n  [112] See in this connection L. v. Schroeder, Pythagoras und\n  die Inder, eine Untersuchung \u00fcber Herkunft und Abstammung der\n  pythagoreischen Lehren (Leipzig; 1884).\n\n  [113] This has reference to the preserved hunting parks, or\n  \"paradises,\" of the Babylonian monarchs.\n\n  [114] Reading [Greek: philosoph\u00f4] for [Greek: philosoph\u00f4n].\n\n  [115] Rathgeber (G.) in his Grossgriechenland und Pythagoras\n  (Gotha; 1866), a work of marvellous bibliographical industry,\n  refers to three supposed portraits of Apollonius (p. 621). (i)\n  In the Campidoglio Museum of the Vatican, Indicazione delle\n  Sculture (Roma; 1840), p. 68, nos. 75, 76, 77; (ii) in the\n  Mus\u00e9e Royal Bourbon, described by Michel B. (Naples; 1837), p.\n  79, no. 363; (iii) a contorniate reproduced by Visconti. I\n  cannot trace his first reference, but in a Guide pour le Mus\u00e9e\n  Royal Bourbon, traduit par C. J. J. (Naples; 1831), I find on\n  p. 152 that no. 363 is a bust of Apollonius, 2\u00be feet high,\n  carefully executed, with a Zeus-like head, having a beard and\n  long hair descending onto the shoulders, bound with a deep\n  fillet. The bust seems to be ancient. I have, however, not been\n  able to find a reproduction of it. Visconti (E. Q.) in the\n  atlas of his Iconographie Grecque (Paris; 1808), vol. i. plate\n  17, facing p. 68, gives the reproduction of a contorniate, or\n  medal with a circular border, on one side of which is a head of\n  Apollonius and the Latin legend APOLLONIVS TEANEVS. This also\n  represents our philosopher with a beard and long hair; the head\n  is crowned, and the upper part of the body covered with a tunic\n  and the philosopher's cloak. The medal, however, is of very\n  inferior workmanship, and the portrait is by no means pleasing.\n  Visconti in his letterpress devotes an angry and contemptuous\n  paragraph to Apollonius, \"ce trop c\u00e9l\u00e8bre imposteur,\" as he\n  calls him, based on De Tillemont.\n\n  [116] See Chassang, op. cit., p. 458, for a criticism on this\n  statement.\n\n  [117] This was before Vespasian became emperor.\n\n  [118] This was a staff, or baton, used as a cypher for writing\n  dispatches. \"A strip of leather was rolled slantwise round it,\n  on which the dispatches were written lengthwise, so that when\n  unrolled they were unintelligible; commanders abroad had a\n  staff of like thickness, round which they rolled their papers,\n  and so were able to read the dispatches.\" (Liddell and Scott's\n  Lexicon sub voc.) Hence scytale came to mean generally a\n  Spartan dispatch, which was characteristically laconic in its\n  brevity.\n\n  [119] See i. 7, 15, 24, 32; iii. 51; iv. 5, 22, 26, 27, 46; v.\n  2, 10, 39, 40, 41; vi. 18, 27, 29, 31, 33; viii. 7, 20, 27, 28.\n\n  [120] I.e., Cynic.\n\n  [121] Chassang (op. cit., pp. 395 sqq.) gives a French\n  translation of them.\n\n  [122] Art. \"Apollonius,\" Smith's Dict. of Class. Biog.\n\n  [123] That is to say, a philosopher of 600 years ago.\n\n  [124] That is to expiate blood-guiltiness with blood-sacrifice.\n\n  [125] Chaignet (A. \u00c9.), in his Pythagore et la Philosophie\n  pythagoricienne (Paris; 1873, 2nd ed. 1874), cites this as a\n  genuine example of Apollonius' philosophy.\n\n  [126] That is his idea of death.\n\n  [127] The text of the last sentence is very obscure.\n\n  [128] The full title is given by Eudocia, Ionia; ed. Villoison\n  (Venet.; 1781), p. 57.\n\n  [129] See Zeller, Phil. d. Griech, v. 127.\n\n  [130] Pr\u00e6parat. Evangel., iv. 12-13; ed. Dindorf (Leipzig;\n  1867), i. 176, 177.\n\n  [131] A play on the meanings of [Greek: logos], which signifies\n  both reason and word.\n\n  [132] Psyche, I. ii. 5.\n\n  [133] Noack, ibid.\n\n  [134] See Noack, Porphr. Vit. Pythag., p. 15.\n\n  [135] Ed. Amstelod., 1707, cc. 254-264.\n\n\n_WORKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR._\n\n+THE PISTIS SOPHIA: A Gnostic Gospel.+\n\n   (With Extracts from the Books of the Saviour appended).\n   Originally translated from Greek into Coptic, and now for the\n   first time Englished from Schwartze's Latin Version of the\n   only known Coptic MS., and checked by Am\u00e9lineau's French\n   Version. With an Introduction and Bibliography. 394 pp., large\n   octavo. Cloth, 7s. 6d. net.\n\n\n_SOME PRESS OPINIONS._\n\n   \"The Pistis Sophia has long been recognised as one of the most\n   important Gnostic documents we possess, and Mr Mead deserves the\n   gratitude of students of Church History and of the History of\n   Christian Thought, for his admirable translation and edition of\n   this curious Gospel.\"--_Glasgow Herald._\n\n   \"Mr Mead has done a service to other than Theosophists by his\n   translation of the Pistis Sophia. This curious work has not till\n   lately received the attention which it deserves.... He has prefixed\n   a short Introduction, which includes an excellent bibliography.\n   Thus, the English reader is now in a position to judge for himself\n   of the scientific value of the only Gnostic treatise of any\n   considerable length which has come down to us.\"--_Guardian._\n\n   \"From a scholar's point of view the work is of value as\n   illustrating the philosophico-mystical tendencies of the second\n   century.\"--_Record._\n\n   \"Mr Mead deserves thanks for putting in an English dress this\n   curious document from the early ages of Christian\n   philosophy.\"--_Manchester Guardian._\n\n\nTHE THEOSOPHICAL PUBLISHING SOCIETY,\n\nLONDON AND BENARES.\n\n\n+FRAGMENTS OF A FAITH FORGOTTEN.+\n\nSome short Sketches among the Gnostics, mainly of the First Two\nCenturies--a Contribution to the Study of Christian Origins based on the\nmost Recently Discovered Materials.\n\n   +I. Introduction.+--Outlines of the Background of the Gnosis;\n   Literature and Sources of Gnosticism.\n\n   +II. The Gnosis according to its Foes.+--Gnostic Fragments\n   recovered from the Polemical Writings of the Church Fathers;\n   the Gnosis in the Uncanonical Acts.\n\n   +III. The Gnosis according to its Friends.+--Greek Original\n   Works in Coptic Translation; the Askew, Bruce, and Akhmim\n   Codices.\n\nClassified Bibliographies are appended. 630, xxviii. pp., Large Octavo,\nCloth. 10s. 6d. net.\n\n\nSOME PRESS NOTICES.\n\n   \"Mr Mead has done his work in a scholarly and painstaking\n   fashion.\"--_The Guardian._\n\n   \"The ordinary student of Christian evidences, if he confines\n   his reading to the 'Fathers,' learns nothing of these opinions\n   [the so-called Gnostic 'heresies'] except by way of refutation\n   and angry condemnation. In Mr Mead's pages, however, they are\n   treated with impartiality and candour.... These remarks will\n   suffice to show the unique character of this volume, and to\n   indicate that students may find here matter of great service\n   to the rational interpretation of Christian\n   thought.\"--_Bradford Observer._\n\n   \"The book, Mr Mead explains, is not intended primarily for the\n   student, but for the general reader, and it certainly should\n   not be neglected by anyone who is interested in the history of\n   early Christian thought.\"--_The Scotsman._\n\n   \"The work is one of great labour and learning, and deserves\n   study as a sympathetic estimate of a rather severely-judged\n   class of heretics.\"--_Glasgow Herald._\n\n   \"Written in a clear and elegant style.... The bibliographies\n   in the volume are of world-wide range, and will be most\n   valuable to students of theosophy.\"--_Asiatic Quarterly._\n\n   \"Mr Mead writes with a precision and clearness on subjects\n   usually associated with bewildering technicalities and\n   mystifications. Even the long-suffering 'general reader' could\n   go through this large volume with pleasure. That is a great\n   deal to say of a book on such a subject.\"--_Light._\n\n   \"This striking work will certainly be read not only with the\n   greatest interest in the select circle of the cultured, but by\n   that much larger circle of those longing to learn all about\n   Truth.... May be summed up as an extraordinary clear\n   exposition of the Gnosis of Saints and the Sages of\n   philosophic Christianity.\"--_The Roman Herald._\n\n   \"Comprehensive, interesting, and scholarly.... The chapters\n   entitled 'Some Rough Outlines of the Background of the Gnosis'\n   are well written, and they tend to focus the philosophic and\n   religious movement of the ancient world. There is a very\n   excellent bibliography.\"--_The Spectator._\n\n   \"Mr Mead does us another piece of service by including a\n   complete copy of the Gnostic _Hymn of the Robe of Glory_ ...\n   and a handy epitome of the _Pistis Sophia_ is another item for\n   which the student will be grateful.\"--_The Literary Guide._\n\n   \"The author has naturally the interest of a theosophist in\n   Gnosticism, and approaches the subject accordingly from a\n   point of view different from our own. But while his point of\n   view emerges in the course of the volume, this does not affect\n   the value of his work for those who do not share his special\n   standpoint.... Mr Mead has at any rate rendered us an\n   excellent service, and we shall look forward with pleasure to\n   his future studies.\"--_The Primitive Methodist Quarterly._\n\nThis is the First Attempt that has been made to bring together All the\nExisting Sources of Information on the Earliest Christian Philosophers.\n\n\n+SIMON MAGUS: An Essay.+\n\n   The most complete work on the subject. Quarto. Price: 5s. net.\n   Wrappers.\n\n+THE WORLD MYSTERY: Four Essays.+\n\n   Contents: The World-Soul; The Vestures of the Soul; The Web of\n   Destiny; True Self-reliance. Octavo. Price: cloth, 3s. 6d.\n   net.\n\n+THE THEOSOPHY OF THE GREEKS.+\n\n+PLOTINUS.+\n\n   With an exhaustive Bibliography. Octavo. Price: cloth, 1s.\n   net.\n\n+ORPHEUS.+\n\n   With three Charts and Bibliography. Will serve as an\n   Introduction to Hellenic Theology. Octavo. Price: cloth, 4s.\n   6d. net.\n\n+THE THEOSOPHY OF THE VEDAS.+\n\n+THE UPANI[S.]HADS: 2 Volumes.+\n\n   Half Octavo. Paper, 6d.; cloth, 1s. 6d. each net.\n\n   VOLUME I.\n\n   Contains a Translation of the [)I]sha, Kena, Ka[t.]ha,\n   Prashna, Mu[n.][d.]aka, and M[=a][n.][d.][=u]kya\n   Upani[s.]hads, with a General Preamble, Arguments, and Notes\n   by G. R. S. Mead and J. C. Cha[t.][t.]op[=a]dhy[=a]ya (Roy\n   Choudhuri).\n\n   VOLUME II.\n\n   Contains a Translation of the Taittir\u00eeya, Aitareya, and\n   Shvet[=a]shvatara Upani[s.]hads, with Arguments and Notes.\n\n\n\n\n\n<pre id=\"pg-footer\">","title":"Apollonius of Tyana, the Philosopher-Reformer of the First Century A.D.","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":35596}