wards the end of the Roman republic and during the period immediately following it, Pythagorism revived with wonderful intensity of vigour. Men of great authority on such subjects (Mr. Zeller amongst others, the learned professor of Marburg) have thought lately that this revival of Pythagorism is the true source of those communities of Egyptian Therapeutae and Essenians from Palestine whose origin is wrapped up in so much obscurity. It is now quite easy to understand why all these more or less real sorcerer-philosophers were, or said they were, Pythagoreans, and hence it is not surprising that Porphyry and Iamblichus, who wished to have a Pagan Christ, should have selected Pythagoras in preference to the suspicious individual presented to their notice by Philostratus in the person of Apollonius. It is a very difficult matter in these days to realise the serious manner in which these two eminent men collected together the tales which were in circulation respecting the philosopher of Samos. What days those must have been when a writer like Porphyry could relate in perfect good
