Talk:Osiris myth

message: The article states that this myth originated in the Middle Kingdom, that Apep was its original villain, and that Set only became Osiris' murderer in the New Kingdom. However, I have a book on Egyptian hieroglyphs which says, "Already in the Pyramid Texts Set is held to be the murderer of Osiris and the opponent of Horus in what appears to be a developed mythological cycle." The Pyramid Texts date from the middle of the Old Kingdom, so this flatly contradicts the article. However, the book gives no more detail on the subject, and I do not feel comfortable rewriting whole sections of the article without further information. Anyone who has better information, please rewrite the article or tell me where to find it. A. Parrot 02:16, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  History of the myth 

message: I believe that the phrasing "Osiris was resurrected. So it was that Isis conceived Horus. " is unnecessarily coy. While one version of the myth has it that Isis breathed life into Horus or that Horus magically appeared, other evidence plus the fact that Isis went to considerable lengths to recreate (magically) the missing piece of Osiris--his phallus--lends greater credibility to other versions suggesting that they had sex and Horus was the normal biological result. Such an idea might have been entertaining and not as morally reprehensible to the Egyptians as it apparently is to later historians and internet interpreters. 
The more neutral but nod of the head in this direction might at least be "Osiris was resurrected. So it was that Isis and Osiris conceived Horus."
 --174.7.25.37 (talk) 20:45, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Horus' Parents 

message: This article says that Set ate Osiris' penis, whereas, the Osiris article says that a fish ate it.  Does anyone know where the differing interpretations come from? Petronivs (talk) 15:15, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: The versions I've heard elsewhere say it was a fish. It's possible that the fish was (or became) associated with Set because fish were usually regarded as unclean, and as the Egyptian view of Set darkened he came to be associated with just about every unclean creature. It's also possible that there's no basis for Set's involvement at all, and the person who wrote that was just full of it. A. Parrot (talk) 18:00, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I suspected that it's either a misinterpretation or the person who wrote it was full of it, as you said, but I am definitely nothing even close to an expert on Egyptian mythology, so I wanted to point it out in case someone knowledgeable knows anything about it.  I also pointed out the conflict on the main Osiris talk page, as more people probably watch that. Petronivs (talk) 21:56, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Osiris' Penis 

message: Why are the pictures in these articles shown as europeans. Everyone on this planet knows that the Ancient Egyptians were black africans. Why are you people so jellous of african history, could it be because the europeans dont have one.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.17.22.149 (talk) 22:33, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not the appropriate venue to be spreading Afrocentrist fairy tales.  The pictures in the article all depict pharaonic era Egyptian art, so if you object to the way these characters are depicted, your issue is with the ancient artisans who created these images.  I guess Egyptian artists had an anti-Afrocentrism bias.  Trilobright (talk) 01:02, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: racial imagery

message: Appalling overuse of commas throughout this article. Commas separate list items! The article has been written as though the author thinks that a comma indicates a "speech pause". This is a common error, as is using a comma before the word AND.
:British and American style conventions use commas differently; Americans use more, Britons use fewer. (Under WP:Manual of style#National varieties of English, neither is preferred over the other, as long as articles consistently use one variety.) I assume based on your IP address that you're British. As an American, I'm familiar with American conventions. I think my comma usage adheres to those rules, although there's a lot of ambiguity in them. If there's an error somewhere, check it against a Chicago Manual of Style and point it out. A. Parrot (talk) 16:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Overuse of punctuation 

message: No mention at all of the background of the Osiris myth wrt the extremely quick spread of Christianity in Egypt in the 1st century? Because of Osiris, the Egyptians were fond of resurrection myth, and Mary//Isis fit well with established habits also. Why is none of this discussed? Fig (talk) 09:23, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I haven't found sources to address the issue of similarities with Christianity in detail. A lot of sources do touch on the issue briefly. But when people try to include information about it in an article, many people see it as an attempt to undermine Christianity by claiming it was influenced by "paganism"—and then you have endless squabbles between Christians and anti-Christians (look at old discussions at Talk:Isis, Talk:Horus, and Talk:Osiris to get an idea). I'd rather not deal with that without sources that thoroughly examine how Osiris and company may have influenced Christianity or made it easier for Egyptians to accept. Fortunately, I have found a source and should obtain it soon. When I do, I'll add something about the Christian connection. A. Parrot (talk) 16:59, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps this just needs a see also Jesus_Christ_in_comparative_mythology#Ancient_Egypt EdwardLane (talk) 08:57, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

text: Because this is an internet legend, largely promulgated by the conspiracy 'documentary' Zeitgeist, and subsequently by Bill Maher.  There's nothing to it in real life.  The purported life and aspects of Jesus don't resemble Horus anymore than they do Quetzalcoatl or Viracocha.  Trilobright (talk) 01:05, 2 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Resurrection, Christianity, Horus 

message: I think it is more than likely that some of the books in a temple library would have contained accounts of the myths to accompany the rituals. Plutarch would have had to commission a translation of the. A. Alcock  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pamour (talk • contribs) 12:18, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plutarch 

message: "Set—whom Plutarch, using Greek names for many of the Egyptian deities, refers to as "Typhon"—conspires against Osiris with seventy-three other people"
The correct number is seventy-two. Possibly in other versions of the myth it was seventy-three but in Plutarch's version it was seventy-two and this is the most-often cited number in Egyptian studies. http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Plutarch/Moralia/Isis_and_Osiris*/A.html
207.38.199.125 (talk) 21:27, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: I was lumping together the 72 conspirators with the "queen who came from Ethiopia". I've adjusted that passage in the article to say "seventy-two unspecified accomplices, as well as a queen from Ethiopia". A. Parrot (talk) 22:42, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 17 February 2015 

message: in the beggining it says that osiris killed set , while its the opposite
188.36.251.246 (talk) 02:01, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: You seem to be misreading the text. The second and third sentences say Osiris is murdered and that Set is the murderer. A. Parrot (talk) 20:07, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 6 April 2016