CHAP. XV. ERRORS RESPECTING OSIRIS. 307 



that which has satisfied us respecting the last- 

 mentioned points, we must for the present content 

 oiu-selves with the statements of PUitarch and other 

 writers respecting the festivals of Isis and Osiris. 

 We must conclude that they were solemnized at 

 the periods they mention, and for the reasons as- 

 signed by them, connected with the seasons of the 

 year, or the relation supposed to subsist between 

 the allegorical history of his adventures and natural 

 phaenomena. 



But we cannot believe that the Paamyha, men- 

 tioned by Plutarch, were a festival in honour of 

 Osiris, which, he says, resembled the Phallaphoria, 

 or Priapeia of the Greeks.* And though a plaus- 

 ible reason seems to be assigned for its institution, 

 it is evident that the phallic figures of the Egyp- 

 tian temples represent Khem, the generative prin- 

 ciple, who bore no analogy to Osiris ; and there is 

 no appearance of these two Deities having been 

 confounded, even in the latest times, on the monu- 

 ments of Egypt. Such opinions seem to have been 

 introduced by the Greeks, who were ignorant of 

 the religion of the Egyptians, and who endeavoured 

 to account for all they heard, or saw represented, 

 by some reference to the works of nature, com- 

 pelling every thing to form part of their favourite 

 explanation of a fanciful fable. But, injustice to 

 Plutarch, it must be observed, that he gives those 

 statements as the vulgar interpretations of the 

 fabulous story of Isis and Osiris, \vithout the 

 sanction of his own authority or belief; and he 



* Pint. dels. s. 1-2. and 18. 



X 2 



