Talk:Ancient Egyptian deities

message: These relevant links are getting removed by User:Beetstra and User:Shadowbot. 
* Makara's List of Egyptian Gods from A to H. angelfire.com/me3.
* Makara's List of Egyptian Gods from I to Z. angelfire.com/me3. 
* Makara's List of Egyptian Goddesses. angelfire.com/me3.
UNLESS a valid reason (not the spam one, as this is not spam), these sites should be reinserted. J. D. Redding 15:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: it appears that links to angelfire were automatically rejected. This was probably a mistake, and the :meta:Spam Blacklist at present forbids only one particular angelfire account (/poetry/seidel/). dab (𒁳) 13:58, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Linkss

message: I am concerned about some of the claims in the lead of the article, such as
*Being a culture dating from 10,000 B.C. or before,
*the earliest anthropomorphic deities are presumed to be great goddess figures such as Mut or Ma'at.
and a few others. I am not clear about what the date is referring to, but I can't imagine an argument for a precursor to Egyptian goddesses that goes that far back in history. I'd be interested in seeing references for such claims. — Zerida 08:35, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: these were, of course, bullshit claims (added in September by ), and have been duly removed. --dab (𒁳) 12:27, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, I must say that I have taken a look at 83d40m's contributions and I find many other questionable claims in several other articles. I might have to bring it up on WP:ANEGY, but will approach her/him about it first. — Zerida 02:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original research 

message: I think it's time to stop using the words of a foreign language to say the names of the dieties. Those are all names that descend from the invaders. As historians and intellectuals, we know the true names and should use them.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.114.143.28 (talk) 12:49, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Original Names 

message: Having read the opening of this article I am concerned at the lack of mention of henotheism and the work of Erik Hornung and others.  To rehearse some ancient debate between Petrie and budge seems pointless. Anyone agree? Apepch7 (talk) 15:14, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Certainly. Trying to explain the current theological debate at Ancient Egyptian religion has given me headaches, but if you want to try dealing with it here, go ahead. A. Parrot (talk) 19:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text:  ah ok I should have read that first before posting.  Its a difficult subject but I have had a recent email conversation with a philosopher in the US who calls the Egyptian approach polycentric polytheism based on the writings of Proclus who was a pagan Greek Neoplatonist, which is similar to henotheism or monolatry.  I think at least I will have a go at making the pantheon and religion pages closer.Apepch7 (talk) 23:08, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Henotheism 

message: Someone has been changing the words god to God in a few articles recently - I have reverted one example because I feel that God with a capital G is the monotheistic Judeo/Christian/Muslim God and not a term for deities generally.Apepch7 (talk) 11:17, 12 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gods or gods 

message: Can someone provide a reference for this family tree.  I recognize parts of it but not all.  Also where do the attributes eg. Nephthys 'lamentation' come from?  ThanksApepch7 (talk) 21:54, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I've seen most of these genealogical connections in one place or another, though not all. The underlying problem with the chart is oversimplification—the actual myths are so diffuse and contradictory that constructing a single family tree is pointless. To wit: Shu, Tefnut, Geb, Nut, Isis, Osiris, Seth, and Nephthys are often described as having the same relationships that they have in this chart. However, myths that describe their genealogy this way give Atum as their ultimate ancestor, not Ra. One myth does describe Neith as the mother of Apep and Ra, but it says nothing about their relationship to Nun, Khepri, or Atum. Horus is sometimes the son of Geb and Nut rather than of Isis and Osiris, Anubis is sometimes the son of Ra, and on and on. The same oversimplification is true with the attributes: the chart tries to squeeze the gods' complex characteristics into a few words. (Nephthys, incidentally, is associated with lamentation for Osiris, but that's only one of her characteristics, and I don't think she had any real unifying identity.) Given the chart's problems, I'm inclined to just ditch it. A. Parrot (talk) 02:22, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: My instinct is to delete it too but I felt it only right to give someone a chance to justify it.  The Nephthys = lamenation thing ... I don't like the tendency of some to equate gods/goddesses to a particular function - the deities are complex in nature and its a big step from saying that Nephthys laments Osiris to saying she is the goddess of lamentation.  But the main point is exactly as you have said you can't squeeze the deities into fixed family relations like this.Apepch7 (talk) 13:44, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

text: I think it should be removed, it is a way to complicated subject to be summed up in a single chart. - IanCheesman (talk) 04:35, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Deleted. Apepch7 (talk) 18:14, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Blast. Apparently, before we cut that tree out of this article, User:Lanternix turned it into a template. Now User:BomBom, apparently unaware of this discussion, turned that into an article: Family tree of the Egyptian gods. I think the article should be deleted for the same reasons that it was deleted for here, but now that will involve a deletion debate. If I'm going to plunge into that mess, I'd like to have some support from other people. What do you think? A. Parrot (talk) 19:07, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

text: I don't like it any better than I did before.  It is completely unreferenced and has no dates to show which period is being portrayed.  The idea that Nu(n) and Neith were a couple - like great great grand parents I find so simplistic that it will confuse utterly anyone researching the subject.  So you have my full support for deletion. Apepch7 (talk) 18:27, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The deletion debate for that page is here. A. Parrot (talk) 03:02, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Family Tree Section 

message: When I was a kid, The Children's Museum of Indianapolis had a mummy room with images of various deities all over the wall.  They still have the mummies, but that particular installation is long gone.  I remember being scared because of a snake-headed deity on the wall.  This deity had a long neck, but did not have the hood of a cobra.  Does anyone know what this deity might be? --Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 18:49, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Snake deity

message: I believe this article should be moved to Ancient Egyptian deities. Scholars sometimes use the term "pantheon" to refer to the gods collectively, but not as often as they use just "deities" or "gods". For example, the relevant article in the Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt is titled "Deities". In their book Gods and Men in Egypt, Françoise Dunand and Christiane Zivie-Coche specifically address the use of the term: "We often invoke the word pantheon, of course. If we mean by it simply the totality of gods and goddesses of Egypt, the term is acceptable, but it explains nothing. If it indicates a global organization, comparable to the totality of human society, it is ill taken. Unlike the Greek pantheon, which is our inevitable reference point, the divine configurations of Egypt were structured on levels that could always interact with one another, without ever amounting to a panorama of a single, perfectly hierarchized society." (p. 29)
The articles about deities in other polytheistic systems aren't much help as examples of what to do here. Most "Fooian deities" titles are redirects to articles about the religion or mythology of a culture, or to bare lists of deities in that culture. (See, for instance, Semitic deities, Chinese deities, and Roman deities). "Pantheon" seems to be used for only one other article title, Celtic pantheon. Even Greek pantheon is a redirect to Twelve Olympians, a narrower group of gods. But for Hinduism, there is a Hindu deities article, independent of Hinduism, Hindu mythology, and List of Hindu deities. I think that is the best approach in most cases, including this one.
As usual, I'm unsure whether the qualifier "Ancient" is needed, but because modern Egyptians have at least one god (God in Abrahamic religions), I'm erring on the side of caution. If people who comment here think the title should just be "Egyptian deities", I'll go with that. A. Parrot (talk) 06:46, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. Moving the page to a new title is easy; I can just click the "move" button at the top of the page and type in the new title, and everything on this page moves to the new title. I am working on a rewrite of the article, but that's mostly separate from changing the title. The rewrite is an overview of the gods' general characteristics (with loads of examples), so it will explain how the major gods' natures are far too complex to be pigeonholed in one role. A. Parrot (talk) 16:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Ok.  First may I give a vote of thanks to you for doing so much to improve the Egyptolgy on Wiki.  If its easy to just move then I would suggest that would be a good idea.  Then maybe just take out any obvious duplication or dare I say it contradiction.  Then begin to ship away from there at the detail (?) Apepch7 (talk) 19:15, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll move it soon. I just want to wait a few days to see if anyone else comments here, since I left a note about these discussions on the wikiproject page. A. Parrot (talk) 23:53, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Move proposal

message: The section List of deities of Ancient Egypt takes up about half the length of this article, even though it's nowhere near complete—there are only 109 deities listed, whereas The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt by Richard H. Wilkinson lists about 150. George Hart's Dictionary of Egyptian Gods lists a similar number, including half a dozen that aren't in Wilkinson, and I've collected a personal list of at least 55 gods that aren't listed in those books but are mentioned in other Egyptological sources. And James P. Allen once estimated the total number of Egyptian deities at about 1,400. The list could grow truly enormous and dwarf the rest of the article, even if the article were better developed. 
The list is probably too bulky to conform to the guideline for lists within articles, and it would certainly be too bulky if it were as thorough as it should be. There is already a stand-alone list on this same subject: List of Egyptian deities, which began as a copy of this article's list. I think the list should be removed from this article and its content merged into that of the stand-alone list (to which this article would link). Anyone agree or disagree? A. Parrot (talk) 06:46, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I really don't know how to organize a list of deities or what descriptions to give. Egyptian gods are an organizational nightmare. But how do we decide what gods are worthy of their own article? There are many cases where the decision is obvious—Isis and Ra need articles, and Mestjet (see Wilkinson, p. 179) does not. But there are borderline cases like Amunet, about whom somebody raised the issue last year (see Talk:Amunet#Merge Amun and Amunet?). There isn't enough information about her in the article now, but enough information may well exist, somewhere in the scattered mass of inaccessible Egyptological studies. A. Parrot (talk) 16:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Is it possible to call up a list of all existing entries under Egyptian deities?  My Wiki knowledge is very limited.  If so then I think the first step would be just to make sure that any list contains all those deities which already have a page.  Then when we know what we've got to scout round and see if there are any glaring omissions and/or inclusions which don't really merit their own page (a tougher call).  I think some deities are very much the adjunct to other deities, such as your example of Amunet who (correct me if I'm wrong) I would mainly mention as one of the eight Ogdoad and the pair of Amun (hidden-ess).  So I wouldn't give her, her own page.  Structuring the list is probably a nightmare so I would suggest just alphabetical with sub-sets where they clearly fall into groups eg. Ogdoad again or Sons of Horus (do we need to list Hapi, Imsety, Duamutef and Quebsenuef as well???).  Otherwise avoid things like family groupings ... for instance Isis can appear in various relationships to Horus and so on ... which is back to other point about one line descriptors.Apepch7 (talk) 19:25, 29 September 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: There is Category:Egyptian deities. It's messy and haphazard, but I think it includes all the Egyptian deity articles in the wiki. Some of them are splits or duplicates of other topics, and others may not be gods although the articles claim they are (like Imiut fetish), but here are the article names I collected from the category, excluding articles like Queen of heaven (antiquity) that aren't gods at all. A. Parrot (talk) 23:53, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

text: There seem to be a number of pages on some fairly obscure deities like Iabet for instance .. who is clearly 'the East' personified as a goddess in the Amduat.  There's a lot of work in here!  Even some of the names are a problem eg. Sutekh ... most would look for Set or perhaps Seth.  I feel an attack wiki-despair coming on. lol. Apepch7 (talk) 12:47, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: List of deities

message: Somebody, using various IP addresses from Hanoi, has changed the transliteration of the Egyptian words for "god" and "goddess" in this article several times in the past two months. In writing the article, I rendered these words as nṯr and nṯrt, based on the transliteration system used in James P. Allen's book Middle Egyptian, the source I cited for the hieroglyphic spellings. The IP user keeps changing them to nthr and nthrt. I keep changing it back, though with increasing unease, as these changes are adding up to a slow edit war. I've put messages on the talk pages for these IP addresses, but I don't think the message ever catches up with the editor because his or her IP keeps changing.
As I said in those messages, many systems are used to transliterate the Egyptian language, but the systems that use th to transliterate the middle consonant in nṯr are far out of date. Our article about the transliteration of Egyptian has a chart of several of the systems that are widely used today. The list includes some of the major reference works on the Egyptian language, like the Wörterbuch der aegyptischen Sprache and Alan Gardiner's Egyptian Grammar, and the systems range in date from the early 20th century to the start of the 21st. Of the eight systems listed, five use ṯ to transliterate the sound in question. One uses T, one uses č, and one uses c. So ṯ seems to be the most common sign for this sound, and th may not appear in any source in current use. On top of that, th makes English speakers think of the sound at the beginning of words like "thin" and "thatch", which is not the sound that the Egyptian ṯ is believed to represent. For these reasons, I really think the sound should not be transliterated this way.
I don't know what to do about this problem, because I can't seem to communicate with the IP user. I've left a note at the talk page of the latest IP address. If the anonymous user sees it, I ask him or her to discuss the reasons for the transliteration change below. If anybody else reads this, I'm asking for suggestions about how to handle it if the IP user doesn't respond. A. Parrot (talk) 18:15, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Although I don't know Egyptian, my impression from encountering it regularly (mainly in the context of ancient Greek and Roman religion) is that the system of transliteration you follow predominates current scholarship. Since it's an IP, the simplest remedy would be protection, but I don't know whether the level of disruption rises to that. In my view, however, you've attempted to notify the user(s), and have invited discussion in your edit summaries, without getting a response, so it's unnecessary disruption: I just had to revert it again. Since there's no single entity to deal with, I'd probably try placing a protection request at WP:RPP. To me, an FA is a readier candidate for protection, because it's less in need of attracting passing editors for improvement. (At the same time, I do see small but high-quality edits made by passing IPs.) Cynwolfe (talk) 19:57, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Yeah, I don't see what can be done other than semi-protection, but semi-protection is usually reserved for articles that are getting several unconstructive edits a day. Today's edit was the first in nearly two months. And the transliteration difference isn't terrible damage to the article; most of my frustration comes from the inability to communicate. If the IP editor does it again soon (like the first time around, when there were several instances in one week), I suppose I'll go to RFPP and see what they say. I just wish there were a better option than chasing the editor from address to address. A. Parrot (talk) 21:19, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Transliteration of the Egyptian words for "god" and "goddess" 

message: *Citation #3 is "Allen 1997, pp. 44–54, 59". In the "works cited", there are two works of James P. Allen, dated from 1999 and 2000 and one from 2001 in notes section. Could we be more explicit on the 1997 dated source? --Mskyrider (talk) 11:33, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I've considered that possibility, but in long articles, including this one, I often use text notes that have their own references within the note. I don't know of a way to incorporate the harv citation within a note the same way I've done so far with standard <ref> tags. I'm no expert on referencing systems, though. If there's a way to do it, I'd have no objection to converting to the harv system. A. Parrot (talk) 18:25, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: I looked it up, and it is 2004. Thank you for your help. A. Parrot (talk) 14:25, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question about a citation 

message: Could the text from Hornung's book be pasted here that supports the article assertion "By the Late Period (c. 664–323 BC), several sites across Egypt were said to be the burial places of particular deities." as it doesn't appear in my edition. I'm curious as to the number of "dead" (who Hurnung in my edition points out are "not dead", p. 160) . Yt95 (talk) 10:20, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Page 156 in my copy: "In the late period the tombs of gods are also depicted and mentioned as being on earth—in Thebes even the tombs of the great primeval gods [referring to Medinet Habu, said to be the resting place of the Ogdoad], who were not created and should therefore reach back to the deathless world before creation, but who fall prey to the consistent extension of of the idea of mortality which encompasses all deities. The best-known tombs are those of Osiris at Philae, Dendara, and Abydos (among many other places). A text from the eighteenth nome of Upper Egypt also speaks of an entire necropolis of tombs of gods, and the sites of tombs of gods are known from Edfu and Hermopolis." A. Parrot (talk) 17:20, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Citation check 

message: The usage and primary topic of "Gods of Egypt" is under discussion, see talk:Gods of Egypt (film) -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:39, 17 May 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: {{noredirect|Gods of Egypt}}

message: Say something about Nefertiti's eyes... 223.191.49.223 (talk) 18:26, 14 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Nefartiti