he, the starving critic, could scarcely be blamed for following-in a very humble fashion, and at a very long interval—that elevated example For the most part, his official duties at Alexandria he devolved upon a deputy, so that his learned leisure was little disturbed at Athens, where, as already stated, he died at an advanced age, but at what date is quite uncertain.

Such are the somewhat meagre facts collected from his writings. To these his earlier biographers or critics, led by the lexicographer Suidas, have been pleased to make some sensational and apocryphal additions. Suidas, of whom nothing is known except that he belongs to a very late date in Byzantine literary history, having, probably, in mind the story of the tragic end of the infidel Euripides, assures his readers that the " blasphemer found a well-merited end in having been torn to pieces by wild dogs; and, not content with so unique a termination to his earthly career, adds, as to his posthumous existence, "in the future, with Satan, he will have his portion in eternal fire." Another equally discreet authority, of the sixteenth century, Raffaelle Maffei (or Volaterranus, as he is called from his birthplace), avers that he was a malicious apostate from Christianity, attributing to him the bon mot, that he had gained nothing from his old creed but change of name-Lucianus in place of Lucius (or Lykinus). To these and similar mendacious assertions Erasmus replies, "they attached to him the name of blasphemer, that is, 'evil-speaker;' but they who did so, one may be sure, were those whose festering sores he had probed.' To his bitter and persistent satirical assaults upon the established religion, and upon the contending sects of (so-called) "philosophy," we may be sure, not a few (ephemeral) replies appeared but no notices of them have come down to

us.

While, however, the last echoes of pagan sacerdotal or sectarian animosity, excited by his exposures, died away at the establishment of Christianity, orthodox zeal, on the other side, even still sometimes regards him as the declared enemy of the Christian faith. The hostility of the earlier Christian authorities had been aroused, in particular, by two very famous Dialogues-the Peregrinus and the Philopatris ("The Patriot"). As for the latter, it has been proved,

beyond reasonable doubt, to have been the production of a much later writer, bearing the same name as the reputed author; while, as for the former, the chief offence originated in a mistaken reading or interpretation of the text, where allusion is made to the Founder of Christianity.' In fact, the brief allusions of the Greek satirist to the new faith seem to discover less hostility than is displayed in his ridicule of the rival Oriental creeds, of the established religion itself, or of the popular systems of philosophy and ethics.

If Lucian has been thus vilified by the ignorance or malice of critics of early days, on the other hand, from the first moment of his resurrection, at the restoration of learning from the first appearance of the editio princeps, in 1496-he received an enthusiastic recognition of his rare merits from the best scholars of the time. Among them towers conspicuously the illustrious Erasmus, one of the earliest translators (1514), in conjunction with Sir Thomas More, of the great master of Ridicule, whom he himself so admirably imitates in his Encomium Moric

1

According to the text of Hemsterhuis and Lehmann, the especially significant and highly interesting passage in question-by many critics believed to have been purposely mutilated-reads as follows:-" At which time, he [Peregrinus] made himself thoroughly master of the wonderful philosophy of the Christians, associating, in Palestine, with their priests and scribes. And-for what need of details ?-in a short time he brought them to be all mere children in his hands, aspiring to the character of prophet, to be president of their public services, and convener of their Assemblies (Otavapxns kai žvvaywyevs), and he was, in fact, all in all to them. Of their books some he interpreted and expounded, many of them even he himself wrote; and they regarded him in the light of some divine being, set him up as their legislator, and chose and publicly acknowledged him as their special patron [here occurs the suspected hiatus]. They, in fact, worship that great man who was crucified in Palestine, because of his introducing into the world this new religious mystery (TɛλɛTŋ).”— On the Death of Peregrinus, 11. For péyav his earlier Christian critics seem to have read μayov ("magician"), a reading which is approved by Gesner; while to the epithet "wonderful" has been assigned an ironical meaning. Of Peregrinus a more favourable account is given by Gellius (no very high authority), and Ammianus Marcellinus (a late writer), as well as by the Christian writers Athenagoras and Tertullian. The Philopatris (in which satirical allusion is made to the visions of St. Paul) is assigned to the year 363, the date of the Emperor Julian's Persian expedition. Cf. Philopseudes, 16.

("Praise of Folly "), and, not altogether so happily, in his Colloquies. Citing the well-known verse of the Latin satiristpoet,

Omne tulit punctum qui miscuit utile dulci,

66

he protests :- no one, if not Lucian, has succeeded in illustrating this truth. He has imitated the raillery, without copying the wantonness, of the Old Comedy. Gracious heaven! [deum immortalem is his strong expletive of admiration], with what sly humour, with what grace and elegance, he touches everything! With what power of sarcasm he holds up every folly to ridicule, how he seasons everything with his wonderful wit-touching no absurdity that he does not cover with some irony or satire ! Such grace, continues Erasmus, echoing the dictum of Archbishop Photius, "dominates in his style, there is so much felicity of invention, so much elegance in his wit, such pungency in his more serious assaults; he so tickles with his allusions, so mingles the grave with the gay, in such a way does he enunciate truth with a smile, so admirably does he picture the manners, the characters, the pursuits of men, as it were, with a painter's pencil; in such a manner does he display things which we can not only read but actually see, that whether one regards entertainment, or utility and instruc tion, there is no comedy, no satire, that has a right to be put in competition with his Dialogues." At the beginning of the sixteenth century, at least, this high eulogy was scarcely an exaggeration.

Among the Dialogues translated (into Latin) by Erasmus, it is interesting to note, are the Timon and the Alexander; by More (who, as an ecclesiastical zealot, and as Lord Chancellor, so soon forgot the spirit of his author, and the principles of his own Utopia), the Menippus, the Philopseudes ("The Lover of Lies"), and the Tyrannicide. Even Melancthon, the associate of Luther in the Reformation struggle in Germany, assisted in the work of annotating the great sceptic (1527). Rabelais, although there is no evidence that he took part in illustrating so congenial a mind, must have been greatly indebted to him. Early in the next century (1615) his most considerable French editor, Bourdelot, enthusiastically maintains that, "in proportion as the

7

influence of Lucian's writings was diffused, the love of knowledge and virtue increased, which still resides in the hearts of a few ;" and goes so far as to affirm that by such influence the culture, and even civilization, of the philosopher's native country perceptibly benefited in the succeeding age. A Dutch critic, Hoogstraaten, believes him to have been "not only the greatest genius of his own age, but even of all antiquity." These high eulogiums, for the most part, have been repeated by later critics to the days of Hemsterhuis and Reitz (whose judicious settlement of the text, and criticism and summary of the labours of preceding editors and annotators, respectively, first made to the world a worthy presentation of his genuine and attributed productions), and by competent judges of our own time. The English historian of Greek Literature, J. W. Donaldson, holds that "his merits can scarcely be over-estimated,' and "considering him with reference to his own age, and to the Literature of Greece," justly adds the learned historian, a position of the utmost importance must be assigned to him, both in regard to the systems of religion and of philosophy to which he gave the death-blow, and in respect to the cultivation of a purer Greek style, which he vainly taught and exemplified. During the sixteenth century sixty-five editions (in Greek or Latin), in the seventeenth twenty-two, in the eighteenth forty-four (besides translations), bore ample witness to the estimation in which he was held by the learned world. In England the first edition of him (and that only in part) did not appear till 1677. The first version (in part) in 1634. No English translation of any pretension appeared till that of Carr (1775-1798), a spirited, but extremely free, presentation of him, which was followed by that of Franklin, Professor of Greek at Cambridge (1780), and of Tooke (1820)-Franklin's, although not very faithful or accurate, being altogether the most valuable of the three chief English presentations of Lucian. Of French translations, Talbot's (1857) has the greatest repute. Of German versions, that of Wieland, the well-known poet and romancist (1788), is easily first; and, indeed, it is generally held to be entitled to the foremost place among all attempts at a modern representation of the Greek wit.

Lucian is almost encyclopædic in the extent and rarity of his productions-critic, moralist, philosopher, politician, poet, romancist, littérateur. Of the eighty-four separate writings attributed to him, and published in the editions of his works, not a few find an undeserved place there. Some pieces of inferior merit are the production of his earlier rhetorical period, and show sufficiently evident traces of the stilted style characteristic of the fashionable declamatory essay, as well in matter as in manner. Of his undoubted productions, the shorter pieces-Dialogues of the Gods, of the Sea-Gods, and of the Dead--by reason of their popular subject-matter and peculiar graces of style, have always been most generally read. His more considerable masterpieces are Zeus the Tragedian, the Sale of Lives, the Timon, the Ferry Boat, the Twice Accused, the Fisherman, the Fugitives, the Banquet, the Convicted Zeus, the Convention of the Gods, the Charon, the Icaro-Menippus, the True History, the Prometheus, the Philopseudes, How History Ought to be Written (the first attempt at a philosophy of history, but not of sustained merit throughout), the Peregrinus, On Sacrifices, On Mourning, and the Alexander. In the Greek Anthology twenty Epigrams are ascribed to a writer bearing the name of Lucian. Whether the composition of the Lucian or not, they are by no means unworthy of his genius,' and they are among the best in the whole extensive Collection.

It is his theological Dialogues that have most contributed

Especially admirable are those numbered IX., XIII., XCVI. (Westminster Selection); XXXVIII., LX., LXII., LXIII. (Eton Selection); XXXII., XL., CCLXIII. (Edwards's Selection), Bohn's English edition, 1854. E. g.:"The wealth of the soul is the only true wealth" (xx., Ed. S.). "Let a seal on words not to be spoken lie on the tongue. A careful watch over words is better than one over wealth" (XL., Ed. S.). "Address to the Gout: ". "O Goddess! who hatest the Poor, and art the sole subduer of wealth, who knowest how to live well' at all times, thou delightest to be supported on strange feet, and knowest how to wear shoes of felt, and ointments are a care to thee. Thee, too, garlands delight, and the liquor of the Ausonian Bacchus. But these things never exist, at any time, for the Poor. And, therefore, thou fliest from the threshold of Poverty, that has no gold, and art delighted, on the other hand, in coming to the feet of Wealth” (xxxII., Ed. S.). This rich subject for satire inspired the burlesque drama of Lucian, entitled Tragopodagra (" Gout in Tragedy ").