Osiris myth is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 24, 2012. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
June 12, 2012. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that
Egyptian writings about the
myth of Osiris do not clearly describe
Osiris' death because the Egyptians feared that doing so might negatively affect the world? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ive just realised how confused this article could appear with regards to the difference between horus the elder and horus the child. Once I have sorted this out at Horus, I will come back and fix it here.
The second paragraph of the 'The coffin and the acacia' is alot confusing. If there was a link to the legend it references, that might help.
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)A. Parrot
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)
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)
In 40 years of reading Egyptian mythology, I've never read or heard that Set ate Osiris's penis. I find the complete lack of any real references in this article very disturbing. There should at least be a couple of references to proper books specifically on Egyptian mythology or the Plutarch's De Iside et Osiride in translation, etc. etc.
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)
The pictures in this article are not European. That said, there are other images not in this article where it is more clear that Osirus is black. If you have rights to one of those then you should certainly add it. 165.82.90.155 ( talk) 20:40, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
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.
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)
Does this mean that Isis was dead when she conceived (and gave birth to) her son? I realise that anything is possible with such gods, but should it not state that Osiris posthumously impregnated Isis, who then bore Horus?
While events may not have occurred exactly as the legend would have them, there is certainly substantial evidence to suggest that this tale actually occurred in some form or other. With this in mind, could we please stop referring to it as a myth? 144.124.24.57 ( talk) 10:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, seems quite biased to refer to this religous tale as a myth, and not others. -- 198.161.238.19 ( talk) 12:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
If substantial evidence exists, this should be cited, otherwise it is hard to avoid referring to such a tale as a myth. For example, claimimg you had got pregnant by your deceased spouse is not that credible; there could be another explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.177.99.72 ( talk) 13:25, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
The entire Intro has not one single reference citation in it. And since someone wrote that "Most of its [the legend's] elements originated in religious ideas", and not the other way around, I'd like to see some sources and justification of that. Claiming to know the origin of an ancient story is always an eyebrow-raiser. So then, How is a single insertion of citation needed a "gratuitous request"? Please explain and justify Undoing my insertion, Modernist. Thank you. Misty MH ( talk) 16:49, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
I checked out the Citation in Origins for the claim there and in the Intro. It just happens to refer to 2 of only a FEW pages that are N/A at Google Books for this work! And the book itself at Amazon costs a minimum of $525 for the short paperback! How convenient (irony-sarcasm). This makes it difficult to check the reference. ~ Conspiracy theory/hypothesis/thought: Wondering if someone puts in fake or real references on Wikipedia that cannot be looked up online (like in Google Books) so that they can sell very pricy books. ~ Maybe I'll find it in a library. Misty MH ( talk) 18:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) Edit: Removed reference to my editing the name, because I Undid that edit. :) Misty MH ( talk) 18:40, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Anyone here have the book Seth, God of Confusion: A Study of His Role in Egyptian Mythology and Religion by H. Te Velde, or Herman Te Velde? The 1967 edition (cited) or the 1977 edition? Someone had to have added that Citation.... Thank you! Misty MH ( talk) 18:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
How does one find out quickly who added a Citation? Thanks! Misty MH ( talk) 18:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
The person who rewrote this article first came to my attention through an edit summary in which he wrote " Maybe THIS will put that "born of a virgin" garbage to rest" [1]. Frankly this comment and the subsequent extensive edits that result in the article we have today and his comments on the main talk page "that Osiris myth contains dismemberment, beheading, adultery, necrophilic incest, and coercive homosexual incest" [2] indicates clearly a pov axe grinder. I have already dealt with the issue of Isis as a Virgin above. [3] but I would like to point out material that other scholars treat in substantial depth which this editor largely ignores as part of the Osiris Myth. There is no concievable way he can be unaware of this since it is covered in the very same books he uses as a reference source and this further supports my suspicion that Parrot is misusing/mimicking scholarly techniques in order to ridicule that which he detests. The index entry for Osiris Myth includes “Judgment of the Dead” pp. 161-164 and pp173-177. (Donald Redford et al) It seems to form the single biggest theme in the entries for the Osiris Myth which is hardly surprising since the afterlife of the A.Egyptians was predicated on moral fitness when they appeared before Osiris. “The myth of Osiris, judge of souls in the netherworld and shepherd to immortality, was at the heart of ancient Egypt.” (Osiris, Mojsov, p. xi, 2005) See the article Maat
How on earth can any article dealing with the Osiris Myth miss out what was most important to the Ancient Egyptians in their religious texts and instead load it full with the ribald or, as Parrot describes it, “dismemberment, beheading, adultery, necrophilic incest, and coercive homosexual incest“. Even the book which deals with the non-religious texts in some detail doesn't fail to point out that “information in this area [sexual practices] comes primarily from written sources, which, in many cases, advise a far-reaching sexual moderation. The sapiential literature of ancient Egypt contains warnings…..” (Eros on the Nile, Mysliwiec, p. 138, ISBN 0-7156-3302-3) The study of Ancient Egyptian religious texts relating to Osiris, Maat, and the striving for moral truth led Robert Wright, an agnostic, to assert in Evolution of God that "Christians and Muslims matched this power, but they didn't surpass it." By a curious coincidence Plutarch describes how the murder of Osiris by Seth continues throughout time and he singles out one form it takes:
For Isis is a Greek word, and so also is Typhon [Seth], her enemy, who is conceited, as his name implies, because of his ignorance and self-deception. He [Seth] tears to pieces and scatters to the winds the sacred writings, which the goddess collects and puts together and gives into the keeping of those that are initiated into the holy rites, since this consecration, by a strict regimen and by abstinence from many kinds of food and from the lusts of the flesh, curtails licentiousness and the love of pleasure, and induces a habit of patient submission to the stern and rigorous services in shrines, the end and aim of which is the knowledge of Him who is the First, the Lord of All, the Ideal One. [Osiris]” (2.)
Plutarch would no doubt describe Seth as rejoycing at this article which does indeed tear to pieces Osiris. I would favour reverting the article back to a point before Parrot took his axe Ancient Egyptian civilization. Yt95 ( talk) 15:14, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
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)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"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. [1]
207.38.199.125 ( talk) 21:27, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
References
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
in the beggining it says that osiris killed set , while its the opposite 188.36.251.246 ( talk) 02:01, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Osiris myth is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | |||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 24, 2012. | |||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
A
fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
June 12, 2012. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that
Egyptian writings about the
myth of Osiris do not clearly describe
Osiris' death because the Egyptians feared that doing so might negatively affect the world? | |||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
This article is rated FA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Ive just realised how confused this article could appear with regards to the difference between horus the elder and horus the child. Once I have sorted this out at Horus, I will come back and fix it here.
The second paragraph of the 'The coffin and the acacia' is alot confusing. If there was a link to the legend it references, that might help.
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)A. Parrot
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)
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)
In 40 years of reading Egyptian mythology, I've never read or heard that Set ate Osiris's penis. I find the complete lack of any real references in this article very disturbing. There should at least be a couple of references to proper books specifically on Egyptian mythology or the Plutarch's De Iside et Osiride in translation, etc. etc.
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)
The pictures in this article are not European. That said, there are other images not in this article where it is more clear that Osirus is black. If you have rights to one of those then you should certainly add it. 165.82.90.155 ( talk) 20:40, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
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.
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)
Does this mean that Isis was dead when she conceived (and gave birth to) her son? I realise that anything is possible with such gods, but should it not state that Osiris posthumously impregnated Isis, who then bore Horus?
While events may not have occurred exactly as the legend would have them, there is certainly substantial evidence to suggest that this tale actually occurred in some form or other. With this in mind, could we please stop referring to it as a myth? 144.124.24.57 ( talk) 10:07, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Agreed, seems quite biased to refer to this religous tale as a myth, and not others. -- 198.161.238.19 ( talk) 12:50, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
If substantial evidence exists, this should be cited, otherwise it is hard to avoid referring to such a tale as a myth. For example, claimimg you had got pregnant by your deceased spouse is not that credible; there could be another explanation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.177.99.72 ( talk) 13:25, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
The entire Intro has not one single reference citation in it. And since someone wrote that "Most of its [the legend's] elements originated in religious ideas", and not the other way around, I'd like to see some sources and justification of that. Claiming to know the origin of an ancient story is always an eyebrow-raiser. So then, How is a single insertion of citation needed a "gratuitous request"? Please explain and justify Undoing my insertion, Modernist. Thank you. Misty MH ( talk) 16:49, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
I checked out the Citation in Origins for the claim there and in the Intro. It just happens to refer to 2 of only a FEW pages that are N/A at Google Books for this work! And the book itself at Amazon costs a minimum of $525 for the short paperback! How convenient (irony-sarcasm). This makes it difficult to check the reference. ~ Conspiracy theory/hypothesis/thought: Wondering if someone puts in fake or real references on Wikipedia that cannot be looked up online (like in Google Books) so that they can sell very pricy books. ~ Maybe I'll find it in a library. Misty MH ( talk) 18:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC) Edit: Removed reference to my editing the name, because I Undid that edit. :) Misty MH ( talk) 18:40, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
Anyone here have the book Seth, God of Confusion: A Study of His Role in Egyptian Mythology and Religion by H. Te Velde, or Herman Te Velde? The 1967 edition (cited) or the 1977 edition? Someone had to have added that Citation.... Thank you! Misty MH ( talk) 18:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
How does one find out quickly who added a Citation? Thanks! Misty MH ( talk) 18:35, 24 September 2012 (UTC)
The person who rewrote this article first came to my attention through an edit summary in which he wrote " Maybe THIS will put that "born of a virgin" garbage to rest" [1]. Frankly this comment and the subsequent extensive edits that result in the article we have today and his comments on the main talk page "that Osiris myth contains dismemberment, beheading, adultery, necrophilic incest, and coercive homosexual incest" [2] indicates clearly a pov axe grinder. I have already dealt with the issue of Isis as a Virgin above. [3] but I would like to point out material that other scholars treat in substantial depth which this editor largely ignores as part of the Osiris Myth. There is no concievable way he can be unaware of this since it is covered in the very same books he uses as a reference source and this further supports my suspicion that Parrot is misusing/mimicking scholarly techniques in order to ridicule that which he detests. The index entry for Osiris Myth includes “Judgment of the Dead” pp. 161-164 and pp173-177. (Donald Redford et al) It seems to form the single biggest theme in the entries for the Osiris Myth which is hardly surprising since the afterlife of the A.Egyptians was predicated on moral fitness when they appeared before Osiris. “The myth of Osiris, judge of souls in the netherworld and shepherd to immortality, was at the heart of ancient Egypt.” (Osiris, Mojsov, p. xi, 2005) See the article Maat
How on earth can any article dealing with the Osiris Myth miss out what was most important to the Ancient Egyptians in their religious texts and instead load it full with the ribald or, as Parrot describes it, “dismemberment, beheading, adultery, necrophilic incest, and coercive homosexual incest“. Even the book which deals with the non-religious texts in some detail doesn't fail to point out that “information in this area [sexual practices] comes primarily from written sources, which, in many cases, advise a far-reaching sexual moderation. The sapiential literature of ancient Egypt contains warnings…..” (Eros on the Nile, Mysliwiec, p. 138, ISBN 0-7156-3302-3) The study of Ancient Egyptian religious texts relating to Osiris, Maat, and the striving for moral truth led Robert Wright, an agnostic, to assert in Evolution of God that "Christians and Muslims matched this power, but they didn't surpass it." By a curious coincidence Plutarch describes how the murder of Osiris by Seth continues throughout time and he singles out one form it takes:
For Isis is a Greek word, and so also is Typhon [Seth], her enemy, who is conceited, as his name implies, because of his ignorance and self-deception. He [Seth] tears to pieces and scatters to the winds the sacred writings, which the goddess collects and puts together and gives into the keeping of those that are initiated into the holy rites, since this consecration, by a strict regimen and by abstinence from many kinds of food and from the lusts of the flesh, curtails licentiousness and the love of pleasure, and induces a habit of patient submission to the stern and rigorous services in shrines, the end and aim of which is the knowledge of Him who is the First, the Lord of All, the Ideal One. [Osiris]” (2.)
Plutarch would no doubt describe Seth as rejoycing at this article which does indeed tear to pieces Osiris. I would favour reverting the article back to a point before Parrot took his axe Ancient Egyptian civilization. Yt95 ( talk) 15:14, 26 October 2012 (UTC)
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)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
"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. [1]
207.38.199.125 ( talk) 21:27, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
References
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
in the beggining it says that osiris killed set , while its the opposite 188.36.251.246 ( talk) 02:01, 6 April 2016 (UTC)