( v )

ter of Apollonius , and his history as written byPhilostratus . To the above opinions I canadd those of the learned and liberal compilersof the new Biographical Dictionary, in con*firmation of my own opinion, who say in theiraccount of Apollonius , that Dr. Lardner hasfully shewn that Philostratus did not write hislife with any reference to that of Christ, andthat his design was to exhibit this philosopheras a counterpart to Pythagoras . As such, theyconclude, he is doubtless to be considered, andwe shall not, I think, pronounce unfairly con-cerning him, if we assert that in him were unit-ed the characters of both the sage and the im-postor.

From fairly weighing the sentiments of theaforesaid learned and judicious scholars, andfrom a careful perusal of the work itself, I agreewith them in thinking it written after the styleand manner in which the Life of Pythagoras iswritten; that a faithful translation of the workcannot do the least harm to the Christian reli-gion, and that all the supernatural tales* related

* Accounts of supernatural events found only in historiansby some ages posterior to the transactions, and of which it isevident that the historian could know little more thanreader, offer no evidence that is satisfactory or can ^pended on. This judicious observation of Mr. Pa .® y ’serves the utmost attention, as it applies with conSi