No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 23 December 2013
Plutarch's treatise περὶ ᾿´Ισιδος καὶ ᾿Οσίριδος is a work of considerable importance not only to the student of later Platonism, but also to the Egyptologist; yet it is a somewhat remarkable fact that it has been much neglected by the latter, although he alone possesses the knowledge that would help to clear up many of the confused and contradictory statements made by Plutarch with regard to Egyptian mythology. The commentaries of Sayce and Wiedemann on the second Book of Herodotus have been invaluable to the historian and mythologist alike; nevertheless, Plutarch's excursus into the realms of Egyptian religious lore has never received the systematic attention of the Egyptologist. It can hardly be said that this is due to the want of importance attached to the subject. It is generally admitted that, whereas the eleventh chapter of the Metamorphoses of Apuleius is our principal source of knowledge concerning the Graeco-Roman cult of Isis, the treatise of Plutarch is almost our only account of the doctrine which the Alexandrian Platonists wove round that goddess and Osiris. There can be little doubt that Plutarch's theories were the same as those generally held by Greek and Roman worshippers of Isis, and the fact that the treatise is addressed to Klea, who appears to have been a professed devotee of the goddess, renders them additionally interesting.
1 The Egyptological notes in Parthey's edition, 1850, are out of date.
2 §xxxv. . . .σὲ γινώσκειν, ὦ Κλέα, δὴ προσ ῇκόν ἐστιν ἀρχηγὸν μὲν οὖσαν ἐν Δελφοῖς τῶν ἀπὸ πατρὸς καὶ μητρός
3 The fact that Plutarch had Ammonios as a teacher is no guarantee of his having any special facilities for acquiring Egyptian religious lore, as names of this kind were frequently borne by pure Greeks or persons brought up in an entirely Hellenic environment.
4 Chapter xlv. Book of the Dead, ed. Budge.
5 
Har-pa-Khrad, lit. ‘Horus, the child.’
6 The last part of this statement seems to be merely a mistaken Greek idea which arose from the appearance of Harpokrates as defined by Egyptian convention 
7 On the coffin and in the tomb of Sety I. the king's name is altered to that of Asary in order not to hurt the susceptibility of Osiris when the dead king took his place among the gods.
8 The divergence between Harpokrates and Heru-ur (Haroeris) or Horus the elder became complete in late Ptolemaic times. It is hard to recognize any connexion between the ancient sky-god Horus of Edfu and the Hellenistic figures of Harpokrates.
9 See Hall, , P.S.B.A. xxvii. pp. 16Google Scholar, 17.
10 Dümichen, , Resultate, 38–41Google Scholar.
11 E.g. ῾Ελληνικὸν γὰρ ἡ Ισίς ἐστι καὶ ὁ Τυφῶν, πολέμιος τῇ Θεψ῀ καὶ δι᾿ ἄγνοιαν καὶ ἀπάτην τετυφωμένος (§ ii.). Τυφῶν was of course quite unknown to the Egyptians; his native name was Set. . . . τὴν δ᾿ ᾿Ισιν . . . πέν θιμον στολὴν ἀναλαβεῖν, όπου τῇ πόλει μέχρι νῦν ὔνομα Κοπτώ, ἔτεροι δε τὸ ὄνομα σημαίνειν οἴονται πτέρησιν (§ xiv.). Οὐκέτι μέντοι λόγου δεῖσθαι τὴν Ταφόσιριν αὐτὸ γὰρ φράζειν τοὔνομα ταφὴν ᾿Οσίριδος (§ xxi.). The Egyptian original of this was probably either 
(Per Asar. Busiris) with the definite article prefixed, or else 
(Ta ape(t) Asar), ‘the place of Osiris.’ Of Osiris himself he has several interpretations, the most absurd being ὁ δὲ Οσιρις ἐκ τοῦ δσίου καὶ ἱεροῦ τοὔνομα μεμιγμένον ἔσχηκε The etymology of Osiris is quite unknown.
12 Neith 
a goddess sometimes, but rarely, thought to have certain attributes in common with Isis.
13 ος is probably the rendering of ‘was’ 
a kind of sceptre, which does not mean ‘many.’ ἰρι is the correct vocalization of 
an eye, however.
14 Clement of Alexandria has a similar version, perhaps incorrectly copied from Plutarch, , Stromateis v. 7Google Scholar.
15 Adonis, Attis, Osiris. The authorities quoted in this work in support of the theory that Osiris was a corn-god are nearly all Ptolemaic or Roman in period, when the belief about Osiris had diverged considerably from those of early times.
16 Fragments d' Héron d'Alexandrie, p. 210.
17 This represents the Egyptian Se-n-hapi, ‘place of Apis.’ The locality is mentioned by Eustathius, in Dionys. Perig. v. 255Google Scholar. See also Brugsch, , Geographische Inschriften, p. 240Google Scholar.
18 Lafaye, , Culte des Divinités d'Alexandrie hors de l'égypte, p. 20Google Scholar.
19 The leopard skin was the more usual garb of the upper priesthood, but this would agree equally well with Bacchic costume.
20 Ivy has not been identified among the plants of ancient Egypt. Χενόσιρις may be for 
Ake-n-Asar. Ake was, however, most probably an onion. Parthey suggests the Coptic 
‘tree.’ A third etymology which is within the bounds of possibility is 
Shont-n-Asar, which would mean the ‘Acacia of Osiris.’
21 Académie des Inscriptions et Belles Lettres, vol. xxxv. 1896.
22 See Hall, , Oldest Civilization of Greece, p. 239Google Scholar. Jane Harrison, Prolegomena to the Study of Greek Religion, chap. viii.
23 Prof. Breasted has made a daring and quite unwarranted flight into the realms of zoology by declaring that Set bore the head of an okapi. History of Egypt, p. 30. In XIth Dynasty funerary inscriptions Set is represented unmistakably as an ass.
24 See Apuleius, Metamorphoses xi.
25 Lafaye, Culte des Divinités d'Alexandrie hors de l'Égypte. The remarkable tomb excavated at Kom-el-Shugafa, near Alexandria, is also most typical of the Grecized Egyptian cult of Alexandria.