( Vi )

in it are false, and founded on the miracles as jcribed to Pythagoras by his fanatical followers.Had Lucian written the life of Apollonius, ashe did that of his pupil, Alexander, the pseudo-prophet, little or no alarm would ever havebeen excited in the breast of either Christian orPagan. However, the English reader may nowform an opinion for himself, and judge of theman, and the design Philostratus had in writingit: he has, for the first time, an opportunity ofperusing the whole life in his own language,accompanied with such notes and observations,as may in some respect tend to illustrate, andrender it more intelligible. Should it be askedwhy this history should be now given to theEnglish reader, after having been so long with-held from him, I will first give in answer thereasons which induced Meric Casaubon to think

force to the miracles ascribed to Apollonius in the followingsolitary history, published by Philostratus above one hundredyears after j his death, and in which, whether the writer hadany prior account, depends upon his single unsupported evi-dence. Besides, continues the same learned writer, accountsof supernatural events published in one country, of whatpassed in a distant country, without any proof that such accountswere known, or received at home, can offer no evidence thatis to be depended on. This distinction, he adds, disposes ofthe aforesaid miracles of Apollonius, most of which are relat-ed to have been performed in India , of which no evidenceremains, that either the miracles ascribed to him, or thehistory of those miracles, were ever heard of in India .