Talk:Dorothy Eady

Rewrite

I have reverted the article to the version of June 5th 2011, because all later versions are simply unacceptable. The article before this reversion was unbelievable; there were no paragraphs whatsoever and no adequate prose, only an endless block of words. It was impenetrable. The info may very well be good, but the text needs to be rewritten, which I might do myself. Until that has been done, the old text simply cannot be used.theBOBbobato (talk) 22:52, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

My apologies for the poor prose etc. It would be a shame to lose such an amount of well sourced material because of my incompetant writing skills but rather than reverting I would encourage you to rewrite to bring it up to standard without interruption from me during the next month. Could I also suggest that if you think there is too much detail that it might be moved into footnotes? If you have any question as to the integrity of what the sources say then let me know as I still have the books if you don't. Yt95 (talk) 16:02, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

I'll try to rework it, but I can't make any promises on how long it would take. I have other commitments...theBOBbobato (talk) 15:28, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

It's been rewritten. No material was removed, though some of it was moved around.theBOBbobato (talk) 04:42, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Consistent spelling

I've gone through and consistently spelled "Omm Sety", "Seti I" and "Sety" (Omm Sety's son). The only variant I've left is an old monograph about Seti I's temple, which used the old spelling of Sety for the pharaoh, which is now out of favour with Egyptologists - see the wikipedia article on Seti I. --2.28.184.86 (talk) 00:52, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

This needs doing again, it's all over the place.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 09:44, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Plants - removed links

"a bath is taken and the body scrubbed with a plant called ghabira by the Muslims and damissa by the Copts". The linked plants were Tridax procumbens for ghabira and Turnera diffusa for damissa. Both these are natives of Central America, and I don't think Egyptians would be importing plants from America for this! Aarghdvaark (talk) 01:19, 18 March 2015 (UTC)

@Aarghdvaark:, the plant that she's referring (or rather, referred) to is Amaranath, or Bassia. Specifically the subspecies "Bassia muricata", or "Egyptian Amaranath"; it's an invasive plant in that part of Africa. We don't have an article on that particular subspecies, but I'll link the parent article. Quinto Simmaco (talk) 00:20, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

@Quinto Simmaco: thanks :) Aarghdvaark (talk) 00:32, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

You're quite welcome. :) Glad I could help. Quinto Simmaco (talk) 01:22, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Added infobox

While she did author some works, and is thought to have ghostwritten some major works in Egyptology in her capacity as a translator and draughtswoman, I used a general "person" infobox. All the information is accurate, as much as I'm aware. Some notes, though:

• I didn't list her occupation or notability as "Egyptologist/Egyptology" because while contemporary and later scholars generally do regard her as one (if self-taught), it was never her occupation, and she was more a peripheral figure. While several scholars have long hinted that at least some of the research/translation/insight contained in the writings of some Egyptologists whom she worked for should be credited to her, it was almost never acknowledged, and she never sought such credit. She was, however, regarded as a scholar in her own right. But given the dearth of works she published to that end, I simply described her as "author/draughtswoman", along with her occupation of caretaker. I included "forklorist" as there seemed to be general scholarly consensus she was at least that.
• I also noted one major reason, aside from her association with prominent Egyptologists and Orientalists, for being notable as an early practitioner of "Kemetism". I figured I'd address that since it might be somewhat contentious. She never identified herself by that term; it was coined toward the end of her life. She did, however, identify herself as a practitioner of ancient Egyptian religion, and that she followed it as closely as possible. To that end, she'd de facto be a Kemetist. She did associate with some spiritualists who sought her out, but never identified herself as such, or with any of the then current "new age" movements. And never conflated her spiritual experiences and beliefs with that milieu. Thus, I think it's safe to give her that label, without it being considered original research.

All that being said, I'm open to suggestions. I also think a picture of her in the infobox would be helpful. As she's deceased, a copyrighted image could probably be declared under fair use. As far as I know, nearly all the pictures of her are from documentaries and newspaper articles, and also from when she was elderly. I have, however, seen one picture of her when she was younger, but I can't recall where. If anyone who knew her has a picture of her they'd like to release, please do.

Also, I avoided [blue]linking her son to the article. He's an accomplished author with a Wikipedia article of his own. However, he no longer goes by Sety (and may have even legally changed his name), and I've never seen his name paired with his mother's, which initially gave me pause as to whether they were related. Since it's possible he might professionally prefer his public image not be paired with the public image of his mother, I've refrained from doing so. If you someone feels it's encyclopaedic to do otherwise, I won't object. Quinto Simmaco (talk) 02:07, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi, the text states that in Edouard Ghazouli's monograph Dorothy Eady is named for translating enigmatic texts. However, that is not the case. The person which is mentioned is Mrs. Bulbub Abd El-Megid. There is no reference in the work of Ghazouli to "Dorothy Eady" or to "Omm Sety".

Regards

Bert Thurlings

Netherlands

ancientmysteries.eu BMCM2007 (talk) 23:47, 18 August 2023 (UTC)

Hor-Ra's story of her life quality issues

The end reads like a discussion; multiple disagreeing parties; no citations, even a url posted in full in the body text. Will attempt to clean up style. If I'm reading the logs, these quality issues are coming from anonymous users. JoBaWik (talk) 02:35, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

• Further read show's it's not salvageable, removed. Here is the text copied in full. Reads as a discussion between unsigned editors 50.88.235.42 and 2600:1001:b01a:24ad:8839:4db5:80bf:4eff. Reads as meta commentary debating the validity of the content of the story, not actually about what was written, with no direct sources.

This story is problematic on many points. Egyptian temples were not orphanages. There were no 'consecrated virgins', temple singers and priestesses were the wives and daughters of local officials and priests. Actors who performed the mystery play of Osiris were also members of the elite not a special class of priests.

While there is no historical evidence to back up the idea of “orphanages’ in AE temples, it is quite conceivable that orphans were offered to temples to work and serve as serfs, particularly if they came from poor families. The concept of orphanages -as known today- didn’t exist in AE, while the premise of dedicating commoners, poor, slaves or prisoners of wars to temples as free labor, servants & serf is well documented. Consecrated virgins did exist in AE. They are well attested and documented in the 25th and 26th dynasties, as well the third intermediate period that followed the New Kingdom (21st, 22nd and 23rd dynasties), a time frame that is relatively close to the 19th dynasty when Seti I ruled. It is possible that similar roles & positions could date back to the Middle Kingdom, see https://www.ancient.eu/God's_Wife_of_Amun/. While the God’s Wife position was reserved for the royal family, and high-ranking roles were often held by the elite, it is probable that consecrated virgins from other society classes existed and played secondary and other supporting roles. Temple staff (singers, priests, workers, administrators, actors, performers and other positions) came from all levels of society. Their numbers and background varied based on many factors; including the role, rank, work or trade type, temple location, size, whether a function was permanent or seasonal, special assignment or reward to those favored by the king or court (even to the poor and commoners), etc. A scenario as described above, including the role, service, position, and eventual consequences to a minor devoted virgin from a lower or middle class family is entirely reasonable and acceptable. Nothing in AE history, traditions or practices can preclude it or rule it out.

It might however be difficult to conceive a scenario whereby a mighty king like Seti I would find it necessary to meet a poor girl in secrecy. Unless it was a one-sided quick encounter when an old powerful monarch met a young teenager. Exercising his god-like power, he used his subject in a brief affair, while the encounter was genuine and life altering experience for the young lady.

JoBaWik (talk) 02:44, 8 May 2020 (UTC)

... but she got better.

@PandaTheExplorer, @Equine-man, are you ok with this [1]? Source at [2]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:38, 19 October 2021 (UTC)