The following information is taken from A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology, Vol. III, pages 323-324, 327, by Professor William Smith & Others, London, 1890.
The most celebrated of the Philostrati is the biographer of Apollonius. The distribution of the various works that bear the name has occupied the attention and divided the opinions of the ablest critics, as may be seen by consulting Vossius (de Hist. Graec. p. 279, ed. Westermann), Meursius (Dissert. de Philostrat. apud Philostrat. ed. Olearius, p. xv, &c), Jonsius (de Script. Hist. Phil. iii. 14.3), Tillemont (Histoire des Empereurs, vol. iii. pp. 86, &c), Fabricius (Bibl. Graec. vol. v. pp. 540, &c), and the prefaces of Olearius and Kayser to their editions of the works of the Philostrati. At the very outset there is a difference regarding the name. The Lives of the Sophists bears the praenomen of Flavius, which we find nowhere else except in Tzetzes. In the title to his letters he is called an Athenian. Eunapius (Vit. Spoh. pronem.) calls him a Lemnian, so does Synesius (Vit. Dion.).
The best means of settling the point is by consulting the author himself; and here we find no difficulty. He spent his youth, and was probably born in Lemnius. He studied rhetoric under Proclus, whose school was at Athens, and had opportunities of hearing, if he was not actually the pupil of some of the foremost rhetoricians and sophists of his time. If we may believe Suidas, Fronton was his rival at Athens, and probably Apsines, who also was opposed to Fronton, and of whom Philostratus speaks as his intimate friend, was his colleague.
As he was called Lemnius from his birthplace, so on his arrival at Rome from Athens, or while teaching there, he was called Atheniensis, to distinguish him from his younger namesake.
The account given by Suidas of his having been alive in the time of the emperor Philip (A.D. 244-249), tallies precisely with what we find written in his own works. Clinton conjectures the time of his birth to be A.D. 182 (Fast. Rom. p. 257), but this seems too late a period, and we may fix on A.D. 172 as not improbable.
We have no notice of the time of his removal from Athens to Rome, but we find him a member of the circle ("kuklos") of literary men, rhetoricians especially, whom the philosophic Julia Domna, the wife of Severus, had drawn around her. (V. Ap. i. 3) It was at her desire that he wrote the life of Apollonius. From the manner in which he speaks of her, and the fact that he does not dedicate the work to his patroness, it may safely be inferred that she was dead when he finished the life; she died in A.D. 217. That the work was written in Rome is rendered probable, from his contrasting the sudden descent of night in the south of Spain, with its gradual approach in Gaul, and in the place where he is writing.
That the same person wrote the life of Apollonius and the lives of the sophists, a fact which we have hitherto assumed, appears from the following facts. He distinctly affirms that he had been in Gaul. The writer of the lives of the sophists had also been in Gaul; for he mentions the mirth which the language of the sophist Heliodorus to the emperor Caracalla, while in Gaul, had occasioned him. This is confirmed when he refers his reader to his work on Apollonius, as well known. He states that he wrote these lives while Aspasius was still teaching in Rome, being far advanced in years. Besides, he dedicates them to a consul named Antonius Gordianus, a descendant of Herodes Atticus, with whom he had conversed at Antioch concerning the sophists.
This Gordianus, Fabricius supposes to have been Gordianus III who was consul A.D. 239 and 241. But to this Clinton justly objects, that not only would the dedication in that case have borne the title "autokrator" instead of "upatos," but Gordian, who in A.D. 239 was only in his 14th year, was too young to have had any such conversation as that referred to. It may have been one of the other Gordiani, who were conspicuous for their consulships. As they were slain A.D. 238, the lives must have been written prior to this event. And as Aspasius did not settle in Rome till A.D. 235, the lives of the sophists were probably written about A.D. 237.
Before proceeding to particularize those of his works that have come down to us, it may be more convenient to speak of their general object and style. In all of them, except for the lives of the sophists, Philostratus seems to have intended to illustrate the peculiar manner in which the teachers of rhetoric were in the habit of treating the various subjects that came before them. They amplified, ornamented, and imitated without regard to historical truth, but solely as a species of gymnastics, which trained the mental athlete to be ready for any exertion in disputation or speaking, to which he might be called.
[Comment: In The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, Philostratus has Apollonius travelling from place to place, engaging in lengthy discussions and arguments about various subjects. Thus, it may be inferred that Apollonius of Tyana was a sophist of sorts himself, whose life was treated separately from the lives of the other sophists.]
In the time of Philostratus, the sphere was circumscribed enough in which sophists and rhetoricians (and it is to be observed that he makes no distinction between them) could dispute with safety; and hence arises his choice of themes which have no reference to public events or the principles of political action.
That he was intimately acquainted with the elements of style as suited to different subjects, is proved by his critical remarks on the writings of his brother sophists. One illustration will suffice. While writing of the younger Philostratus, he says, "The letter written by Philostratus on the art of epistolary correspondence is aimed at Aspasius; for having been appointed secretary to the emperor (Maximin), some of his letters were more declamatory and controversial than was becoming, and others were deficient in perspicuity. Both these characteristics were unbefitting a prince; for whenever an emperor writes, on the one hand the mere expression of his will is all that is required, and not elaborate reasoning, and on the other perspicuity is absolutely necessary; for he pronounces the law, and perspicuity is the law's interpreter."
And in the introduction to his Imagines, he makes an express distinction between the man "Boulomenos sophizetai," and him who inquires seriously regarding the origin of the art of painting. We may infer besides, from an expression in this introduction, where, speaking of painting, he says of it, "pleio sophizetai," that in his view the profession of a sophist extended to all kinds of embellishment that required and exhibited invention and the power of pleasing by mere manner.
The idea ingeniously stated by Kayser (Praef. ad Oper. Phil. p. vi.), that it was also his aim to restore to Greece her ancient vigour, by holding up bright examples of her past glories, does not seem to be characterized by exuberance and great variety of expression. It is sufficiently clear except when he has recourse to irregularities of construction, to which he is somewhat prone, in addition to semi-poetical phrases and archaisms, which he employs without scruple.
And as he undoubtedly intended to exemplify various modes of writing, we have in his specimens of every species of anomaly, which are apt to perplex, till this peculiarity be understood. He is at the same time well versed in the works of the orators, philosophers, historians, and poets of Greece, many of whose expressions he incorporates with his own, especially Homer, Herodotus, Xenophon, Euripides, Pindar, and Demosthenes.
The following is a list of the works of Philostratus :
[Comment: Only the description of The Life of Apollonius of Tyana will be provided here, although a listing of his other works will follow this material.]
The Life of Apollonius of Tyana
A full account of this work, which has principally rendered Philostratus distinguished, is given under "Apollonius." [Vol. I, p. 242, &c.]
[Comment: This account can be found elsewhere in this book in the section titled "Apollonius Tyanaeus."]
It is divided into eight books, and bears the title "Ta Es Ton Tuanea Apollonion." In composing it, he seems at first to have followed Herodotus as his model, whom however he forsakes as he gets into those parts where he finds an opportunity to be more rhetorical, as in the appearance of Philostratus before Domitian (viii. 7). Kayser thinks that in the latter part he had Thucydides in his eye, but Xenophon seems rather to have been his model.
It would be endless to enumerate all the works that have been written in whole or in part regarding this life of Apollonius. An examination or notice of them will be found in the prefaces of Olearius and of Kayser. The work itself was first published by Aldus, 1502, Venice, fol., with a Latin translation by Alemannus Rhinuccinus, and along with it, as an antidote, Eusebius, contra Hieroclem. The other editions having this work contain the whole works of Philostratus, as will be mentioned afterwards.
The life of Apollonius (with a commentary by Artus Thomas) was translated into French by Blaise be Vigenere, 1596, 2 vols. 4to. [sic], and repeatedly republished, the translation being revised and corrected by Fed. Morel, one of the editors of Philostratus (Bayle, art. Apollonius Tyanaeus).
A translation of the two first books, with notes professedly philological, but only partly so, and partly containing a commentary of bitter infidelity, was published in London, 1680, fol. The translation, and probably the philological notes, both of which evince much reading but not accurate scholarship, are by Charles Blount, whose tragical end is told by Bayle. The other notes were partly derived, it is said, from a manuscript of Lord Herbert. This translation was prohibited with severe penalties in 1693, but was twice reprinted on the Continent.
[Comment: Thus it appears that during the years 1502-1693 CE, there was considerable debate in Europe about the veracity of the life of Apollonius of Tyana, with its ultimately being banned as a sacrilege against the Gospels. Other books by Philostratus include :
The Lives of the Sophists
Heroïcus
Imagines
Epistolae
[Then the dictionary continues as follows.]
Of other works of Philostratus, Photius (Cod. 150) takes note of "Aexikon Reporikon"; and he himself speaks of "Logous Korinthiakous." Kayser has published as his a fragment "Peri Gumnastikes" but has not included it in the collected works.
Suidas mentions epigrams among his productions. Of these one only remains bearing his name, and which is probably his. The subject is a picture of Telephus wounded. Both Olearius and Kayser have inserted it.
The works of Philostratus have been twice translated into German, by Seybold, 1776, and by Jacobs, Stuttgart, 1828-33.
[Comment: "... Charles Blount, whose tragical end is told by Bayle." There is no mention of this Charles Blount or his tragical end in the 1980 hard-copy edition of Encyclopedia Britannica. However, we find the following information regarding Pierre Bayle. Quote.]
Bayle, Pierre (b. Nov. 18, 1647, Carla-le-Comte, now Carla-Bayle, Fr. - d. Dec. 28, 1706, Rotterdam, Neth.), philosopher whose Dictionnaire historique et critique, was roundly condemned by the French Reformed Church of Rotterdam and by the French Catholic Church because of its numerous annotations deliberately designed to destroy orthodox Christian beliefs. Bayle was the son of a Calvinist minister and briefly embraced Catholicism in 1669. He acted as tutor, then taught philosophy (1675-81) at the Protestant Academy of Sedan.
After moving to Rotterdam in 1681 to teach philosophy and history, he published (1682) his anonymous reflections on the comet of 1680 that derided the superstition that comets presage catastrophy. Simultaneously he questioned many Christian traditions, thus arousing the ire of a Calvinist colleague, Pierre Jurieu. Bayle's plea for religious toleration (even for atheists) eventually convinced Jurieu that Bayle was an atheist in disguise. The rift between the two was complete when Bayle advocated a conciliatory attitude toward the anti-Calvinist government of Louis XIV; in 1693 Bayle was deprived of his Rotterdam professorship.
Thereafter, Bayle devoted himself to his famous Dictionnaire (1697), ostensibly a supplement to Louis Moreri's dictionary but in fact a work of considerable originality. In this encyclopaedic work the articles themselves - on religion, philosophy, and history - are little more than summary expositions. The bulk of the Dictionnaire consists of quotations, anecdotes, commentaires, and erudite annotations that cleverly undid whatever orthodoxy the articles contained. Vehement objections were voiced, particularly to the article "David," to the bias in favour of Pyrrhonistic (radical) skepticism, atheism, and epicureanism and to the use of Scripture to introduce indecencies. This oblique method of subversive criticism was adopted by 18th-century encyclopaedists.
Bayle was convinced that philosophical reasoning led to universal skepticism, but that nature compelled man to accept blind faith, an extremely popular view in the early 18th century. Bayle's last years were troubled by allegations that he was conspiring with France to detach the Dutch from their Anglo-Austrian alliance. On his death, however, foe and friend alike lamented the passing of a great intellectual.