Claim about Algol[edit]

I'm removing the following text from the article. The first documented observation of Algol's variability is in the late 17th century, i.e., after the invention of the telescope, although apparently it's theoretically possible that the variation could be seen by the naked eye. The Egyptian text doesn't seem to contain any explicit reference to Algol, and I don't know whether any Egyptian text assigns particular significance to Algol—the most important stars in Egyptian tradition, by far, were Sirius and the stars in Orion. The argument seems to rest solely on a similarity between the periodic brightening and dimming of Algol and the pattern of lucky and unlucky days. Moreover, this argument is being used to reconstruct a slightly shorter orbital period for Algol in ancient times: "The mass transfer between the two members of this binary should cause a long-term increase of the orbital period, but observations over two centuries have not confirmed this effect. Here, we present evidence indicating that the period of Algol was 2.850 days three millennia ago." All that seems highly speculative to me, but more importantly, I don't know of any signs that the idea has gained any traction in the Egyptological community. Therefore, I'm putting the references here until I or somebody else can find evidence that the hypothesis has gained wider support. A. Parrot (talk) 00:53, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Horus represented the eclipsing binary Algol in the Calendar of Lucky and Unlucky Days of papyrus Cairo 86637.[1][2]

References

  1. ^ Jetsu, L.; Porceddu, S. (2015). "Shifting Milestones of Natural Sciences: The Ancient Egyptian Discovery of Algol's Period Confirmed". PLOS ONE. 10 (12): e.0144140 (23pp). arXiv:1601.06990. Bibcode:2015PLoSO..1044140J. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0144140. PMC 4683080. PMID 26679699.((cite journal)): CS1 maint: unflagged free DOI (link)
  2. ^ Jetsu, L.; Porceddu, S.; Lyytinen, J.; Kajatkari, P.; et al. (2013). "Did the Ancient Egyptians Record the Period of the Eclipsing Binary Algol – The Raging One?". The Astrophysical Journal. 773 (1): A1 (14pp). arXiv:1204.6206. Bibcode:2013ApJ...773....1J. doi:10.1088/0004-637X/773/1/1.

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:37, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ra-Horackhty[edit]

Ra-Horakhty has been mistranslated the real name is Hor-Ra. Hor was fused with Ra as others such as Amun were and received sun attributes from him.

Hor absorbed a number of Gods including Er (Haroeris) to give light and truth attributes and Ur (Ophois) to give war attributes.

Akhet translates to horizon or on the horizon (in the afterlife) so that line translates as Hor who is Ra on the horizon.

The hieroglyphic name for Hathor translates to house of sky not house of Horus. The bird hieroglyph represents freedom (sky, big blue). 2A00:23C8:AB80:8001:9C0B:6767:B29E:80BD (talk) 03:11, 30 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Heru or Hor[edit]

To reach consensus regarding subjects name

I vote for Hor

Article already states the difference between Horus (Hor) and the separate entity absorbed by him Heru (Haroeris)

I see little reason to discuss this but personally we already have a well sourced answer but to be sure

Thank you for your time voting 2A00:23EE:14A0:304:73C6:293E:DA0C:6C86 (talk) 04:46, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted 2a00:23c8:ab80:8001:ffd9:ad60:bcbc:9c71 again. This editor is trying to use http://www.jeszika.com/egyptian-deities as a source, but it's clearly not a reliable source; it's a commercial website belonging to a painter! Moreover, the relevant text on that page—"Early versions of Horus absorbed a number of local gods - including a hawk god Nekheny and Wer (a god of light with the sun and moon for eyes known as the ‘great one’) in pre-dynastic Egypt"—is very similar to the text from this article and seems to have been copied from it. As I said, Heshbi added the text to this article in 2020, and based on the Wayback Machine, that page on the website may not have existed any earlier than mid-2022. I think what we have here is a case of circular sourcing. A. Parrot (talk) 05:54, 2 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

User:Apokryltaros deleted this section to deny recognition to the sockpuppeteer in the discussion above, but I've reverted the change because I think my reasoning for removing Heshbi's text should be recorded here.
For future reference, wr can mean "eldest" as well as "great" (Raymond O. Faulkner, 1962, A Concise Dictionary of Ancient Egyptian, p. 63) and several sources translate "Harwer" as "Horus the Elder" (George Hart (2005), The Routledge Dictionary of Ancient Egyptian Gods and Goddesses, p. 72; Richard H. Wilkinson (2003), The Complete Gods and Goddesses of Ancient Egypt, p. 201; Geraldine Pinch (2002), Egyptian Mythology, p. 143). A. Parrot (talk) 13:42, 3 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion: Article is at times difficult to follow: Suggest change to the order of the texts[edit]

Discussion:

The article on Horus is, at times, difficult to follow, as it tries to put disparate information together into a coherent whole, which may also mean it is including a measure of interpretations of Horus by later civilizations and also later writers.

I suggest changing the article to show the ancient views of Horus but listed in the order of the extant texts (based on scholarly-based dating).

And so, I suggest that the article largely or primarily begins with and mentions – and include translations of – the actual source texts themselves, starting with the oldest found; and then work up to more-recent texts and interpretations (such as to those that the ancient Greeks and/or Romans had).

I for one want to understand Horus from the onset, not largely from some syncretization of any number of religions or myths.

I'd rather see the article speak of Horus's first appearances in the texts and artifacts/artefacts.

This method of ordering the article could help untangle the weave of later Horus interpretations, not to mention help untangle a lot of current misunderstandings (and even conspiracy theories) that seem more prevalent than actual understandings, historically, of the appearance of Horus in the ancient literature.

What expert of the textual order would love to take this on!

Misty MH (talk) 02:32, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No reason to have a semicolon[edit]

In the third paragraph of this page, there's a sentence:

"However, Plutarch, elaborating further on the same tradition reported by the Greeks; specified that the one 'Horus'..."

There should be a coma not a semicolon. Project Apollo (talk) 20:40, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 9 April 2024[edit]

Add the coptic "ϩⲟⲗ" name to the page's languages 87.221.216.165 (talk) 23:27, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Already done M.Bitton (talk) 22:04, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Categories