113 
himself to the staff of his son, which Joseph held in his hand as the symbol 
of his vice-regal dignity, and kissed him, thus honouring him according to his 
dream (Gen. xxxi. 7). — Rosenm. Scholia. 
On this curious subject I have made more minute inquiry, which will be 
recorded in detail. The explanation given in my paper is, I believe, quite 
the most probable. 
I have to thank Miss Amelia B. Edwards for her kindness in sending me 
very interesting suggestions on this topic. 
Rev. Prebendary Row. — I think that the importance of this Paper 
largely depends upon a paragraph which I notice at the end of the last page ; — 
“ I am quite unable to see cause why this Joseph should, at the bidding 
of some modern critics, be resolved into a meteorologic my thus.” Now, so 
far as I am aware, there is no person among the large range of unbelievers, 
who denies that the Old Testament contains a good deal of good history. 
There is, however, one theory set up in opposition to this, which has been 
elaborated in a work I have read within the last twelvemonths. The author 
of the book in question endeavours to show that the whole of the Old 
Testament characters, and a good many besides, were simply solar myths. 
Having read the book with some care, I must say that I do not think 
much danger to revealed religion will come from it, or from kindred works, 
for it seems so absolute an offence against all the principles of common sense, 
that it will certainly not be of any great use even to controvert the writer’s 
views. (Hear, hear.) On the principles that critics of this kind are 
attempting to resolve the characters of the Old Testament into solar myths, 
I would undertake to make nearly every fact in existence a solar myth. 
(Hear, and laughter.) If their principles were conceded, it would be easy 
to show that every character in Shakspere is really a myth. We all 
know that the sun does, at various times of the year, assume very various 
aspects. I need not attempt to enumerate the actual means or instrumen- 
talities by which these solar myths are manufactured ; it is sufficient to tell 
you that it is from the various appearances the sun presents, aided by the 
fancy of mankind. It seems to me that if the principles laid down by such 
critics as I have referred to are conceded, it would be easy to prove that 
Queen Victoria is a myth ; that Lord Beaconsfield is a myth ; that 
Mr. Gladstone is a myth, and that our worthy selves, here assembled, are all 
solar myths. (Laughter.) This is what seems to be the actual upshot of all 
such criticism, and I think, therefore, that it is hardly worth while, as far 
as this Institute is concerned, to read a Paper intended to refute the 
outrageous logic, and the enormous amount of assumption and fallacy involved 
in such principles. This being so, I do not intend occupying the time of 
this meeting except so far as will enable me to draw attention to what I 
regard as the real point of the controversy. I think the point we ought really 
to consider is this : What we want to maintain is, not that the Old Testament 
contains a great deal of good history, which I believe no one now-a-days 
thinks of disputing, but that the superhuman or supernatural element in it 
YOL. XY. I 
