|
APOLLONIUS, the Pythagorean philosopher,
was born at Tyana, in Cappadocia, in the year of Rome 750, four
years before the common Christian era. His reputation has been
raised far above his personal merits, by the attempt made in early
ages of the Church, and since revived, to bring him forward as
a rival to the Author of our religion. His life was written with
this object, about a century after his death, by Philostratus
of Lemnos, when Ammonius was systematizing the Eclectic tenants
to meet the increasing influence of the Christian doctrines. Philostratus
engaged in this work at the instance of his patroness Julia Domna,
wife of the Emperor Severus, a princess celebrated for her zeal
in the cause of Heathen Philosophy; who put into his hands a journal
of the travels of Apollonius rudely written by one Damis, by Maximus
of that city, a collection of his letters, some private memoranda
relative to his opinions and conduct, and lastly the public records
of the cities he frequented, were the principle documents from
which Philostratus compiled his elaborate narrative, which is
still extant. It is written with considerable elegance, but with
more ornament and attention to the composition than is consistent
with correct taste. Though it is not a professed imitation of
the Scripture history of Christ, it contains quite enough to show
that it was written with a view of rivaling it; and accordingly,
in the following age, it was made use of in a direct attack upon
Christianity by Hierocles, Praefect of Bithynia, a disciple of
the Eclectic School, to whom a reply was written by Eusebius of
Caesarea. The selection of a Pythagorean Philosopher for the purpose
of a comparison with Christ was judicious. The attachment of the
Pythagorean Sect to the discipline of the established religion,
which most other Philosophies neglected; its austerity, its pretended
intercourse with heaven, its profession of extraordinary power
over nature, and the authoritative tone of teaching which this
profession countenance, were all in favor of the proposed object.
But with the plans of the Eclectics in their attack upon Christianity
we have no immediate concern.
On news of his father's death, which took place not long
afterwards, he left Aegae for his native place, where he gave
up half his inheritance to his elder brother, whom he is said
to have reclaimed from a dissolute course of life, and the greater
part of the remainder to his poorer relatives.
The period of silence being expired, Apollonius passed through
the principle cities of Asia Minor, disputing in the Temples in
imitation of Pythagoras, unfolding the mysteries of his Sect to
such as were observing their probationary silence, discoursing
with the Greek Priests about divine rites, and reforming the worship
of Barbarian cities. This must have been his employment for many
years; the next incident in his life being his Eastern journey,
which was not undertaken till he was between forty and fifty years
of age.
His object in this expedition was to consult the Magi and
Brachmans on philosophical subjects; in which he but followed
the example of Pythagoras, who is said to have traveled as far
as India for the same purpose. At Nineveh, where he arrived with
two companions, he was joined by Damis, already mentioned as his
journalist. Proceeding thence to Babylon, he had some interviews
with the Magi, who rather disappointed his expectations; and was
well received by Bardanes the Parthian King, who, after detaining
him at his Court for the greater part of two years, dismissed
him with marks of peculiar honor. From Babylon he proceeded to
Taxila, the seat of Phraotes, King of the Indians, who is represented
as an adept in the Pythagorean Philosophy; and passing on, at
length accomplished the object of his expedition by visiting Iarchas,
Chief of the Brachmans, from which he is said to have learned
many valuable theurgic secrets.
On his return to Asia Minor, after an absence of about five
years, he stationed himself for a time in Ionia; where the fame
of his travels and his austere mode of life procured considerable
attention to his philosophical harangues. The cities sent embassies
to him, decreeing him public honours; while the oracles pronounced
him more than mortal, and referred the sick to him for relief.
From Ionia he passed over to Greece, and made his first tour
through its principle cities; visiting the temples and oracles,
reforming the divine rites, and sometimes exercising his theurgic
skill. Except at Sparta, however, he seems to have attracted little
attention. At Eleusis his application for admittance to the Mysteries
was unsuccessful; as was, at a later period of his life, a similar
attempt at the Cave of Trophonius. In both places his reputation
for Magic was the cause of his exclusion.
Hitherto our memoir has given the unvaried life of a mere
Pythagorean, which may be comprehended in three words, mysticism,
travel, and disputation. From the date of his journey to Rome,
which succeeded his Grecian tour, it is in some degree connected
with the history of the times; and though much may be owing to
the invention of Philostratus, there is neither reason nor necessity
for supposing the narrative to be in substance untrue.
Nero had at this time prohibited the study of philosophy,
alleging that it was made the pretence for Magical practices;
--and the report of his excesses so alarmed the followers of Apollonius
as they approached Rome, that out of the thirty-four who had accompanied
him thus far, eight only could be prevailed on to proceed. On
his arrival, the strangeness of his proceedings caused him to
be brought successively before the consul Telesinus and Tigellinus
the Minister of Nero; both of whom however dismissed him after
examination; the former from a secret leaning towards Philosophy,
the latter from fear (as we are told) of his extraordinary powers.
He was in consequence allowed to go about at his pleasure from
Temple to Temple, haranguing the people, and prosecuting his reforms
in the worship paid to the Gods. But here, as before, we discover
marks of incorrectness in the Biographer. Had the edict against
Philosophers been as severe as he represents, neither Apollonius,
nor Demetrius the Cynic, who joined him after his arrival, would
have been permitted to remain; certainly not Apollonius, after
his acknowledgment of his own Magical powers in the presence of
Tigellinus.
Denied by Philostratus all insight into the circumstances
which influenced the movements of Apollonius, we must attend whither
he thinks fit to conduct him. We find him next in Spain, taking
part in the conspiracy forming against Nero by Vindex and others.
The political partisans of that day seem to have made use of professed
jugglers and Magicians to gain over the body of the people to
their interests. To this may be attributed Nero's banishing such
characters from Rome; and Apollonius had probably been already
serviceable in this way at the Capital, as he was now in Spain,
and immediately after to Vespasianus; and at a later period to
Nerva.
His next expeditions were to Africa, to Sicily, and so to
Greece, but they do not supply any thing of importance to the
elucidation of his character, it may be sufficient thus to have
noticed them. At Athens he obtained the initiation in the Mysteries,
for which he had on his former visit unsuccessfully applied.
The following spring, the seventy-third of his life according
to the common calculation, he proceeded to Alexandria: where he
attracted the notice of Vespasianus, who had just assumed the
purple, and seemed desirous of countenancing his proceedings by
the sanction of Religion. Apollonius might be recommended to him
for this purpose by the fame of his travels, his reputation for
theurgic knowledge, and his late acts in Spain against Nero. It
is satisfactory to be able to bring two individuals into contact,
each of whom has in his turn been made to rival Christ and his
Apostles in pretensions to miraculous power. Thus, claims which
appeared to be advanced on distinct grounds are found to coalesce,
and by the union of their separate inconsistencies contribute
to expose each other. The celebrated cures by Vespasianus are
connected with the ordinary juggles of the Pythagorean School;
and Apollonius is found here, as in many other instances, to be
the mere tool of political factions. But on the character of the
latter we shall have more to say presently.
His Biographer's account of his first meeting with the Emperor,
which is perhaps substantially correct, is amusing from the regard
which both parties paid to effect in their behavior. The latter,
on entering Alexandria was met by the great body of the Magistrates,
Praefects, and Philosophers of the city,; but not discovering
Apollonius in the number, he hastily asked, "whether the
Tyanean was in Alexandria," and when told he was philosophizing
in the Serapeum, proceeding thither he suppliantly entreated him
to make him Emperor; and, on the Philosopher's answering he had
already done so in praying for a just and venerable Sovereign,
he avowed his determination of putting himself entirely into his
hands, and of declining the supreme power unless he could obtain
his countenance in assuming it. A formal consultation was in consequence
held, of which, besides Apollonius, Dio and Euphrates, Stoics
in the Emperor's train, were allowed to deliver their sentiments;
when the latter Philosopher entered an honest protest against
the sanction Apollonius was giving to the ambition of Vespasianus,
and advocated the restoration of the Roman State to its ancient
Republican form. This difference of opinion laid the foundation
of a lasting quarrel between the rival advisors, to which Philostratus
Makes frequent allusion in the course of his history. Euphrates
is mentioned by the ancients in terms of high commendation; by
Pliny especially, who knew him well. He seems to have seen through
his opponent's character, as we gather from Philostratus; and
when so plain a reason exists for the dislike which Apollonius,
in his Letters, and Philostratus, manifest towards him, their
censure must not be allowed to weigh against the testimony of
unbiased writers.
After parting from Vespasianus, Apollonius undertook an expedition
into Ethiopia, where he held discussions with the Gymnosophists,
and visited the cataracts of the Nile. On his return he received
the news of the destruction of Jerusalem; and being pleased with
the modesty of the conqueror, wrote to him in commendation of
it. Titus is said to have invited him to Argos in Cilica, for
the sake of his advice on various subjects, and obtained from
him a promise that at some future time he would visit him at Rome.
On the succession of Domitianus, he became once more engaged
in the political commotions of the day, exerting himself to excite
the countries of Asia Minor against the Emperor. These proceedings
at length occasioned an order from the Government to bring him
to Rome; which, however, according to his Biographer's account,
he anticipated by voluntarily surrendering himself, under the
idea that by his prompt appearance he might remove the Emperor's
jealousy, and save Nerva and others whose political interest he
had been promoting. On arriving at Rome he was brought before
Domitianus; and when, very inconsistently with his wish to shield
his friends from suspicion, he launched out in praise of Nerva
and was forced away into prison to the company of the worst criminals,
his hair and beard were cut short, and his limbs loaded with chains.
After some days he was brought to trial; the charges against him
being the singularity of his dress and appearance, his being called
a God, his foretelling a pestilence at Ephesus, and his sacrificing
a child with Nerva for the purpose of augury. Philostratus supplies
us with an ample defense, which he was to have delivered, had
he not in the course of the proceedings suddenly vanished from
the Court, and transported himself to Puteoli, whither he had
before sent on Damis.
This is the only miraculous occurrence which forces itself
into the history as a component part of the narrative; the rest
being of easy omission without any detriment to its entireness.
And strictly speaking, even here it is not the miracle of transportation
which interferes with its continuity, but his mere liberation
from confinement: which, though we should admit the arbitrary
assertions of Philostratus, seems very clearly to have taken place
in the regular course of business. He allows that just before
the Philosopher's pretended disappearance, Domitianus had publicly
acquitted him, and that after the miracle he proceeded to hear
the cause next in order, as if nothing had happened; and tells
us, moreover, that Apollonius on his return from Greece gave
out that he had pleaded his own cause and so escaped, no allusion
being made to a miraculous preservation.
After spending two years in the latter country in his usual
Philosophical disputations, he passed into Ionia. According to
his Biographer's chronology, he was now approaching the completion
of his hundredth year. We may easily understand, therefore, that
when invited to Rome by Nerva, who had just succeeded to the Empire,
he declined the proposed honor with an intimation that their
meeting must be deferred to another state of being. His death
took place shortly after; and Ephesus, Rhodes, and Crete are variously
mentioned as the spot where it occurred. A Temple was dedicated
to him at Tyana, which was in consequence accounted one of the
sacred cities, and permitted the privilege of electing its own
Magistrates.
He is said to have written a treatise upon Judicial Astrology,
a work on Sacrifices, another on Oracles, a Life of Pythagoras,
and an account of the answers he received from Trophonius, besides
the memoranda noticed in the opening of our memoir. A collection
of Letters ascribed to him is still extant.
It may be regretted that so copious a history, as which we
have abridged, should not contain more authentic and valuable
matter. Both the secular transactions of the times and the history
of Christianity might have been illustrated by the life of one,
who, while an instrument of the partisans of Vindex, Vespasianus,
and Nerva, was a contemporary and in some respects a rival of
the Apostles; and who, probably, was with St. Paul at Ephesus
and Rome. As far as his personal character, is conserned, there
is nothing to be lamented in these omissions. Both his Biographer's
panegyric and his own letters convict him of pedantry, self-conceit,
and affectation incompatible with the feelings of an enlarged,
cultivated, or amiable mind. His virtues, as we have already seen,
were temperance and a disregard of wealth; and without them it
would have been hardly possible for him to have gained the popularity
which he enjoyed. The great object of his ambition was to emulate
the fame of his master; and his efforts seem to have been fully
rewarded by the general admiration he attracted, the honours paid
him by the Oracles, and the attentions shown him by men in power.
We might have been inclined, indeed, to suspect that his
reputation existed principally in his Biographer's panegyric,
were it not mentioned by other writers. The celebrity which he
has enjoyed since the writings of the Eclectics, by itself affords
but a faint presumption of his notoriety before they appeared.
Yet after all allowances, there remains enough to show that, however
fabulous the details of his history may be, there was something
extraordinary in his life and character. Some foundation there
must have been for statements his eulogists were able to maintain
in the face of those who would have spoken out had they been altogether
novel. Pretensions never before advanced must have excited the
surprise and contempt of the advocates of Christianity. Yet Eusebius
styles him a wise man, and seems to admit the correctness of Philostratus,
except in the miraculous parts of the narrative. Lacantius does
not deny that a statue was erected to him at Ephesus, and Sidonius
Apollinaris, who even wrote his life, speaks of him as the admiration
of the countries he traversed, and the favourite of monarchs.
One of his works was deposited in the palace of Antium by the
Emperor Hadrian, who also formed a collection of his letters;
statues were erected to him in the temples, divine honours paid
him by Caracalla, Alexandria Severus, and Aurelianaus, and magical
virtue attributed to his name.
It has in consequence been made a subject of dispute, how
far his reputation was built upon that supposed claim to extraordinary
power which, as noticed in the opening of our memoir, has led
to his comparison with sacred names. If it could be shown that
he did advance such pretentions, and upon the strength of them
was admitted as an object of divine honor, a case would be made
out, not indeed as strong as that on which Christianity is founded,
yet remarkable enough to demand our serious examination. Assuming,
then, or overlooking this necessary condition, skeptical writers
have been forward to urge the history and character of Apollonius
as creating a difficulty in the argument for Christianity derived
from Miracles; while their opponents have sometimes attempted
to account for a phenomenon of which they had not yet ascertained
the existence, and most gratuitously have ascribed his supposed
power to the influence of the Evil principle. On examination,
we shall find not a shadow of reason for supposing that Apollonius
worked Miracles, in any proper sense of the word; or that he professed
to work them,; or that he rested his authority on extraordinary
works of any kind,; and it is strange indeed that Christians,
with victory in their hands, should have so mismanaged their cause
as to establish an objection where none existed, and in their
haste to extricate themselves from an imaginary difficulty, to
overturn one of the main arguments for revealed Religion
To state these pretended prodigies is in most cases a refutation
of their claim upon our notice, and even those which are not in
themselves exceptionable, become so from the circumstances or
manner in which they take place. Apollonius is said to have been
an incarnation of the God Proteus; his birth was announced by
the falling of a thunderbolt and a chorus of swans; his death
signalized by a wonderful voice calling him up to Heaven; and
after death he appeared to a youth to convince him of the immortality
of the soul. He is reported to have known the language of birds;
to have evoked the Spirit of Achilles; to have dislodged a demon
from a boy; to have detected an Empusa who was seducing a youth
into marriage; when brought before Tigellinous, to have caused
the writing of the indictment to vanish from the paper; when imprisoned
by Domitianus, to have miraculously released himself from his
fetters; to have discovered the soul of Amasis in the body of
a lion; to have cured a youth attacked by hydrophobia, whom he
pronounced to be Telephus the Mysian. In declaring men's thoughts
and distant events he indulged most liberally; adopting a brevity,
which seemed becoming the dignity of his character, while it secured
his prediction from the possibility of an entire failure. for
instance, he gave previous intimation of Nero's narrow escape
from lightning: foretold the short reigns of his successors; informed
Vespasianus at Alexandria of the burning of the Capitol; predicted
the violent death of Titus by a relative; discovered a knowledge
of the private history of his Egyptian guide; foresaw the wreak
of a ship he had embarked in, and the execution of a Cilician
Propraetor. We must not omit his first predicting and then removing
a pestilence at Ephesus; the best authenticated of his professed
Miracles, being attested by the erecting of a statue to him in
consequence. He is said to have put an end to the malady by commanding
an aged man to be stoned, whom he pointed out as its author, and
who when the stones were removed was found changed into the shape
of a dog.
On the insipidity and inconclusiveness of most of these legends,
considered as evidences of extraordinary power, it is unnecessary
to enlarge; yet these are the prodigies which some writers have
put in competition with the Christian Miracles, and which others
have thought necessary to ascribe to Satanic influence. Two indeed
there are which must be mentioned by themselves, as being more
worthy our attention than the rest: the raising of a young maid
at Rome, who was being carried to burial, and his proclaiming
at Ephesus the assassination of Domitianus at the very time in
which it took place. But, not to speak at present of the want
of all satisfactory evidence for either fact, the account of the
former, we may observe, bears in its language and detail evident
marks of being written in imitation of Scriptural Miracles, and
the latter has all the appearance of a political artifice employed
to excite the people against the tyrant, and exaggerated by the
Biographer.
But the trifling character of most of these prodigies is
easily accounted for, when we consider the means by which the
author professed to work them, and the cause to which he referred
them. Of Miracles, indeed, which are asserted to proceed from
the Author of nature, sobriety, dignity and conclusiveness may
fairly be required; but when an individual ascribes his extraordinary
power to his knowledge of some merely human secret, impropriety
does but evidence his own want of taste, and ambiguity his want
of skill. We have no longer a right to expect a great end, worthy
means, or a frugal and judicious application of the Miraculous
gift. Now, Apollonius claimed nothing beyond a fuller insight
into nature than others had; a knowledge of the fated and immutable
laws to which it is conformed, of the hidden springs on which
it moves. He brought a secret from the East and used it; and though
he professed to be favored, and in a manner taught by good Spirits,
yet he certainly referred no part of his power to a Supreme intelligence.
Theurgic virtues, or those which consisted in communion with the
Powers and Principles of nature, were high in the scale of Pythagorean
excellence, and to them it was that he ascribed his extraordinary
gift. By temperate living, it was said, the mind was endued with
ampler and more exalted faculties than it otherwise possessed;
partook more fully in the nature of the One universal Soul, was
gifted with Prophetic inspiration, and a kind of intuitive perception
of secret things. This power, derived from the favor of the celestial
Deities, who were led to distinguish the virtuous and high-minded,
was quite distinct from Magic, an infamous, uncertain, and deceitful
art, consisting in a compulsory power over infernal Spirits, operating
by means of Astrology, Auguries and Sacrifices, and directed to
the personal emolument of those who cultivate it. To our present
question, however, this distinction is unimportant. To whichever
principle the Miracles of Apollonius be referred, Theurgy or Magic,
in either case they are independent of the First Cause, and not
granted with a view to the particular purpose to which they are
to be applied.
We have also incidentally shown that they did not profess
to be Miracles in the proper meaning of the word, that is, evident
exceptions to the laws of nature. At the utmost they do but exemplify
the aphorism "knowledge is power." Such as are within
the range of human knowledge are no Miracles. Those of them, on
the contrary, which are beyond it, will be found on inspection
to be unintelligible, and convey no evidence. The prediction of
an earthquake (for instance) is not necessarily superhuman. An
interpretation of the discourse of birds can never be verified.
In understanding languages, knowing future events, discovering
the purposes of others, recognizing human souls when enclosed
in new bodies, Apollonius merely professes extreme penetration
and extraordinary acquaintance with nature. The spell by which
he evokes Spirits and exorcises Demons, implies the mere possession
of a secret; and so perfectly is his Biographer aware of this,
as almost to doubt the resuscitation of the Roman damsel, the
only decisive Miracle of them all, on the ground of its being
supernatural, insinuating, that perhaps she was dead only in appearance.
Hence, moreover, may be understood the meaning of the charge of
Magic, as brought against the early Christians by their Heathen
adversaries; the Miracles of the Gospels being strictly interruptions
of physical order, and incompatible with Theurgic knowledge.
When Christ and his Apostles declare themselves to be sent
from God, this claim to a divine mission illustrates and gives
dignity to their profession of extraordinary power. Whereas the
divinity, no less than the gift of miracles to which Apollonius
laid claim, must be understood in its Pythagorean sense, as referring
not to any intimate connection with a Supreme agent, but to his
partaking, through his Theurgic skill, more largely than others
in the perfections of the animating principle of nature.
Yet, whatever is understood by his Miraculous gift and his
divine nature, certainly his works were not adduced as vouchers
for his divinity, nor were they, in fact, the principle cause
of his reputation. We meet with no claim to extraordinary power
in his Letters; nor when returning thanks to a city for public
honours bestowed on him, nor when complaining to his brother of
the neglect of his townsmen, nor when writing to his opponent
Euphrates. To the Milesians, indeed, he speaks of earthquakes
which he had predicted; but without appealing to the prediction
in proof of his authority. As, then, he is so far from insisting
on his pretended extraordinary powers, and himself connects the
acquisition of them with his Eastern expedition, we may conclude
that credit for possessing a Magical secret was a part of the
reputation which the expedition conferred, A foreign appearance,
singularity of manners, a life of travel, and pretences to superior
knowledge, excite the imagination of beholders; and, in the case
of a wandering people amoung ourselves, appear to invite the individuals
thus distinguished to fraudulent practices. Apollonius is represented
as making converts as soon as seen. It is not, then, his display
of wonders, but his Pythagorean dress and mysterious deportment
which arrested attention, and made him thought superior to other
men, because he was different from them. Like Lucian's Alexander,
(who was all but his disciple,) he was skilled in Medicine, professed
to be favoured by Aesculapius, pretended to foreknowledge, and
was supported by the Oracles; and being more strict in conduct
than the Paphalagonian, he established a more lasting celebrity.
His usefulness to political aspirants contributed to his success;
perhaps also the real and contemporary Miracles of the Christian
teachers would dispose many minds easily to acquiesce to any claims
of a similar character.
In the foregoing remarks we have admitted the general fidelity
of the history, because ancient authors allow it, and there was
no necessity to dispute it. Tried however on its own merits, it
is quite unworthy of serious attention. Not only in the Miraculous
accounts, (as we have already seen,) but in the relation of a
multitude of ordinary facts, an effort to rival our Saviour's
history is distinctly visible. The favor in which Apollonius from
a child was held by Gods and men; his conversations when a youth
in the Temple of Aesculapius; his determination in spite of danger
to go up to Rome; the cowardice of his disciples in deserting
him; the charge brought against him of disaffection to Caesar;
the Minister's acknowledging, on his private examination, that
he was no more than a man; the ignominious treatment by him by
Domitianus on his second appearance at Rome; his imprisonment
with criminals; his vanishing from Court and sudden reappearance
to his mourning disciples at Puteoli; these, with other particulars
of a similar cast, evidence a history modeled after the narrative
of the Evangelists. Expressions, moreover, and descriptions occur,
clearly imitated from the sacred volume. To this we must add the
Rhetorical coloring of the whole composition, so contrary to the
sobriety of truth; the fabulous accounts of things and places
interspersed through the history; lastly we must bear in mind
the principle recognized by the Pythagorean and Eclectic schools,
of permitting exaggeration and deceit in the cause of Philosophy.
After all, it must be remembered, that were the pretended
Miracles as unexceptionable as we have shown them to be absurd
and useless, --were they plain interruptions of established laws,
were they grave and dignified in their nature, and important in
their object, and were there nothing to excite suspicion in the
design, manner, or character of the narrator, --still the testimony
on which they rest is the bare word of an author writing one hundred
years after the death of the person panegyrized, and far distant
from the places in which most of the Miracles were wrought; and
who can give no better account of his information than that he
gained it from an unpublished work, professedly indeed composed
by a witness of the extraordinary transactions, but passing into
his hands through two intermediate possessors. These are circumstances
which almost, without positive objections, are sufficient by their
own negative force to justify a summary rejection of the whole
account. Unless indeed the history had been perverted to a mischievous
purpose, we should esteem it impertinent to direct argument against
a mere romance, and subject a work of imagination to a grave discussion.
|